I have a software architecture and engineering harness that was first constructed from session summaries in ChatGPT and Claude web. Then Claude desktop, then Claude Code.
It’s private and I charge for it and I am always looking at the list of skills and agents people create (I’ve never copied anyone else’s stuff) and so far I like mine better.
It makes me roughly 20x faster at building systems and Claude itself closes gaps in my knowledge like networking and cloud devops.
If you’re serious about producing quality code, it’s my belief that a strong harness is the best way.
There are articles about it from Fowler and Redhat.
This is exactly how tightly coupled, unmaintainable software is constructed.
By picking the tools before understanding the model and building bespoke architecture.
You pick the tools that the business model requires. It might be a relational data store. It might not be. You might want an event store. You might want to reduce costs with lambdas and DynamoDB. You may need a pub/sub event broker.
The OP clearly loves Postgres. Cool. They also have limited experience with complex systems architectures because if they had that experience, they would have never written this article.
I spent about a year as a consultant in the AWS space, visited about ~15 clients of varying sizes.
More often than not there's a single pg aurora instance responsible for 50%+ of the bill. Even worse are the serverless aurora offenders.
All the indexes and guarantees of PG don't come cheaply and dynamodb pricing is not cheap but comparatively reasonable. It really is a good product if you know how to use it.
> This is exactly how tightly coupled, unmaintainable software is constructed.
No. If you're struggling to build software against a DB and then abstract parts to use Redis or ES or whatever in the future, that's kinda a skill issue you or your team have with building poor software to begin with. Nothing to do with using a DB for multiple things like a Queue/Search etc.
… in Massachusetts. New England Republicans are not the bulk of the party, and that’s not all bad - remember, the phrase was “banned in Boston”, not “banned in Bakersfield”.
Bill Clinton was a once-a-century skilled politician, but if you translated his policies without his extreme personal charisma to today it’s unlikely he would make it through the Dem primaries.
Yep and most classical computer engineering approaches have rarely tackled it appropriately in my opinion.
Expecting a von-neuman-machine with at most viaion/audio encoded tin binary to replicate a quantum processing machine with multi spectrum inputs audio/visual/tactile/electromagnetic/olfactory encoded in ternary(ACGT) is only going to simulate a very basic image.
Not to mention the philosophy of the mind/brain dichotomy (including the gut brain[1]) that connects the physical/enviromental/emotional.
In the instance that the physical (silicon/photonic) recreation is not possible the next best direction would be learing how to program the DNA for wetware devices[2].
Why would bots be limited to twitter? Wouldn't Bluesky be just as susceptiblle.
I stopped using Bluesky because I was seeing too many people celebrating the misfortune of others. I didn't have that on twitter, I know people were on the platform behaving like that, but it didn't seem to be what was delivered to me.
I was never a big user of either though. I suspect my lifetime sum of Tweets and Blurts would be under 50.
It's not about susceptibility, it's about actuality. When you open your home page, do you see an army of bots or an army of non-bots? That's what matters.
There isn't an infinite pool of bots out there seeking to get into anything they can. There are like, at most twenty bot actors and they're focused on the most lucrative targets.
Remember when the entire car insurance phone spam in the USA turned out to just be one guy with an army of proxies. There are surprisingly few people at the top of the worldwide spam operations.
Twitter is having bots and spams actively injected rather than them simply existing as a phenomenon. There are not many possible explanation for that other than that its owner is likely wanting them.
Information on bots on Bluesky is limited, but from digging around for a few minutes, Bluesky users report 15-40% of their followers are bots. You seem fairly confident about Bluesky having far fewer bots and fewer foreign agents, so if you have a good link on Bluesky bot and foreign influence statistics, please share it here!
Interesting, because X is able to work the same. When an obvious bot follows an X account, the user can simply block the bot. Also, your X feed can be configured to show posts only from accounts you follow in chronological order, so if you're following a bot, that's on you. Oh, and X hides replies that are probable spam from bots, though you can view them if you'd like. With my X account, they're around but definitely not on my front porch. It seems like you've been given some pretty egregious misinformation; perhaps people report bad experiences with bots because they don't know how to correctly use the platform?
I’ll pass on using a platform owned by a white nationalist who’s betrayed his daughter, openly admitted attempting to rig elections, raided our government of life saving appropriations, destroyed public records, stolen social security data, and makes nearly all of his profits on government contracts while never paying taxes.
They're charging on windows like hordes of zombies attracted to smell of flesh leaking from a bus as it inches forward. It's a horrible sight.
They're all paid accounts mostly claiming to be from poorer ex-Commonwelath colonies and some deep South Asia, slowly spreading eastward. Many are obviously pasting LLM generated responses, sometimes even leaving in "here are response ideas for such tweet" parts. They're slowly giving up on trying to say anything relevant to Twitter trends and resorting to cultist Islamic or biblical something, but they're still operating in some crazy numbers. Blocking or reporting makes no difference since they never get banned anyway and the accounts are constantly rotated. You can't block 10m acccounts manually.
It just makes no sense that this is even a naturally occurring problem that can be mitigated by some tips and tricks. Clearly it's organized, connected, with a lot of money and effort poured in.
It was not a good movie.
reply