I think it’s worth mentioning also- 8 GB ram on a Mac is not the same as 8 GB on a windows OS machine, given the poor state of windows as an OS as of the past few years.
Do browsers and Electron apps magically take up less memory on Macs? What is "good enough?" I never notice problems on my 16GB Windows laptop, so just for fun I closed all of my 6 always-on Electron-type apps, all of the 10 browser windows I had open, a couple other ever-present apps, and it looks like without anything else Windows 10 takes about 4GB, which I think is in the same ballpark as OS X. And I probably have some stuff running that I didn't close, this is very unscientific.
Anecdotally also, my one laptop that I've upgraded to Windows 11 is a lot snappier. As a rule I haven't noticed memory pressure on any device I've owned ever as a "regular user," it only really applies to gaming and heavy development with lots of VMs, especially these days.
I don’t see much “for anybody”, but I do see a lot of “for students / people who browse the web / word processing” which is still a pretty large set of people, and the Neo handles those workloads just fine
13” is not really that small. It’s a screen size many people choose.
The Neo is also not a play for businesses directly. It seems pretty clearly a play for students who will eventually enter the business world with their personal laptop preferences.
I spent one year using an M1 8GB Macbook Air as a professional developer during covid. The A18 Pro flies around the M1. You can definitely use this as a dev - especially when we're just prompting AI nowadays.
So that's what "software engineering" has become nowadays ? Some cargo cult basically. Seriously all of this gives red flag. No statements here are provable. It's just like langhchain that was praised and then everyone realized it's absolute dog water. Just like MCP too. The job in 2026 is really sad.
I think I'm finding a pretty good niche for myself honestly. IMO, Software engineering is more so splitting into different professions based on the work is produces.
This sort of "prompt and pray" flow really works for people, as in they can make products and money, however, I do think the people that succeed today also would've reached for no-code tools 5 years ago and seen similar success. It's just faster and more comprehensive now. I think the general theme of the products remains the same though; not un-important or worthless, but it tends to be software that has effects that say INSIDE the realm of software. I feel like there's always been a market for that, as it IS important, it's just not WORTH the time and money to the right people to "engineer" those tools. A lot of SaaS products filled that niche for many years.
While it's not a way I want to work, I am also becoming comfortable with respecting that as a different profession for producing a certain brand of software that does have value, and that I wasn't making before. The intersection of that is opportunity I'm missing out on; no fault to anyone taking it!
The software engineer that writes the air traffic avoidance system for a plane better take their job seriously, understand every change they make, and be able to maintain software indefinitely. People might not care a ton about how their sales tracking software is engineered, but they really care about the engineering of the airplane software.
I think this is mostly right. The primary difference is that with no code you had to change platforms, but the Prompt and Pray method can be brought to bear on any software easily even the air traffic avoidance system.
It shouldn’t be, but it’s going to take some catastrophic events to convince people that we have to work to make sure we understand the systems we’re building and keep everything from devolving into vibe coded slop.
> the Prompt and Pray method can be brought to bear on any software easily even the air traffic avoidance system.
I guess that's why I see it as a separate profession, as in we have to actually profess a standard for how a professional in our field acts and believes. I think it's OK for it to bifurcate into two different fields, but Software Engineering would need to specifically reject prompt-and-pray on a principled and rational basis.
Sadly yes, that might require real cost to life in order to find out the "why" side of that rational basis. If you meet anyone that went to an engineering school in Québec, ask them about the ceremony they did and the ring they received. [0] It's not like that ceremony fixes anything, but it's a solemn declaration of responsibility which to me at least, sets a contract with society that says "we won't make things that harm you".
I would say, yes its pretty sad. The hypers are kind of gassing themselves up because they, unironically, think they are using LLMs in some special way and they are going to win. I think the industry is ramping up to speed-run into some Tai Lopez type situation.,
We are on borrowed time, most of the world is running on oil and this resource is not unlimited at all. A lot of countries have gone past their production peak, meaning it's only downhill from here. Everything is gonna be more costly, more expensive, our lavish "democracies" lifestyles are only possible because we have (had) this amazing freely available resource, but without it it's gonna change. Even at a geopolitical scale you can see this pretty obviously, countries that talked about free market, free exchange are now starting to close the doors and play individually. Anyways, my point is, we are in for decades, if not a century of slow decline.
Doubt it. Renewables are expanding much faster than oil output is decreasing. Wind and solar will enable energy to remain cheap everywhere that builds it.
Energy production is only part of the bill, though. The oil shortage is having an effect on a mind-boggling variety of consumer goods where crude oil is used in manufacturing. For many products we don't have good alternatives. A lot of oil is needed to build an electric car.
Malthusians has been sounding the alarm for longer than Protestant revivalists have been claiming the end of world is next month at lunchtime. If there is a predication market for such things, betting on any Malthusian is patently foolish.
(Of course, I don't disagree with the notion that consumerism produces an extraordinary amount of worthless trash, but that's a different matter. The main problem with consumerism is consumerism itself as a spiritual disease; the material devastation is a consequence of that.)
People gloating about Malthusians being wrong keep forgetting that it only takes for them to be right ONCE in the entirety of human history and when they are - you'll be too busy trying to survive rather than posting on internet forums.
The planet has a certain resource-bound carrying capacity. It's a fact of physics. Just because we aren't there yet as of (checks time) 2026-03-27, doesn't mean Malthusians are wrong.
Although to be fair to the other side, I think with abundant renewable energy we'll be able to delay resource depletion for a very long time thanks to recycling (and lower standards of living of course).
Renewables provide electricity only, but planes, boats, trucks, basically all the supply chain, works with oil only for the moment. The ease of use of oil has not been replaced yet. Do you realize how easy it is to handle oil ? You can just put it in a barrel and ship it anywhere in that barrel. No need for wires or complex batteries like for electricity, nor complex pipelines like for gas.
And even if we figured out how to electrify everything (which we didn't as I just said), we would still run into resources shortages for batteries, wires (copper etc.), nuclear fuel (uranium)...
Expanding renewables to the easily replaceable items like power plants, generators, and most consumer vehicles would radically reduce oil usage to where it becomes a minor concern. Also things like biodiesel exist. A more sustainable, renewable-forward, electrified reality is easily possible.
There is not a risk of resource shortage of copper. The doomer and prepper talking points you're parroting are not based in reality.
And I don't even understand your other points to be honest. What do you mean "consumer vehicles" ? Are you taking about individual's cars ? I'm not taking about that, these don't matter that much. I'm taking about trucks, boats, planes, the stuff actually shipping you your lifestyle.
It makes sense that you don't understand the other points. Based on how you approach conversation, I suspect it's an issue you run into frequently.
Look up what it means to have a conversation in "good faith" vs in "bad faith" and you might learn something useful about conversation tools. For example, lying about what someone says and calling it "peculiar" is "bad faith".
There will be very dramatic growing pains with this switch, especially for A: nations manufacturing renewables but still running that manufacturing on oil and B: nations that face political and economic barriers for renewables.
Also C: nations that are both A and B, needlessly causing oil volatility with unplanned military dickheadedness.
Transpilation is here a necessary step to test the application because e.g. his browser won't be able to parse raw TypeScript code.
Typechecking is not: the browser doesn't care about it, it's mainly to help the developer verify its code.
So to speed-up the build during development (to have faster iterations) the idea is often to make the building process only about the build by removing "unnecessary" steps like type-checking from it, while having a separate linting / typechecking etc. process, which could even run in parallel - but not be necessary to be able to test the application.
This is often done by using tools like a bundler (e.g. esbuild) or a transpiler (babel, swc) to erase the types without checking them in your bundling process.
Meh, I feel the opposite. Even though I come from a culture that values separation of work and free time a lot (France), I still feel like it's copium. The fact is, if you spend most of your valuable brain time on a task, your brain starts to get shaped for such task, therefore I don't see why you can't identify yourself as your job. The stuff the author talks about, empathy, ability to joke etc. is also heavily influenced by your day-to-day activity, your job. Heck, there are even some people who claim they became aphantasic and lost all capacity for dreams and creativity after working too much with computers.
Anyways, I get the point of the post, capitalism sucks and makes most of our existence as worth as cattle, that is, if we don't value the stuff outside work.
To me it's a typical symptom of a bad economy. If you go to any third world country you'll see such jobs easily. People just gathering scraps to make ends meet because getting money is hard. If it were really "their own terms" they wouldn't do that kind of job at all.
Exactly, I find that type of article too dismissive. Like, we know we don't have to write the full syntax of a loop when we write the spec "find the object in the list", and we might even not write this spec because that part is obvious to any human (hence to an LLM too)
tmux by itself lets you create any number of sessions, windows and panes. You can arrange them for anything you want to do.
Having a pane dedicated to some LLM prompt split side by side with your code editor doesn't require additional tools, it's just a tmux hotkey to split a pane.
There's also plugins like tmux resurrect that lets you save and restore everything, including across reboots. I've been using this set up for like 6-7 years, here's a video from ~5 years ago but it still applies today https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMbuGf2g7gc&t=315s. I like this approach because you can use tmux normally, there's no layout config file you need to define.
It lets me switch between projects in 2 seconds and everything I need is immediately available.
reply