dreadwail
@dreadwail.bsky.social
Reposted by dreadwail
I really do love the spec style syntax for tests (describe, before each, it). When used correctly it's the best at representing test setups and expressing test intent.
I also recognize it has many downsides that have to be accounted for.
Let me tell you, it really sucks resolving merge conflicts.
I also recognize it has many downsides that have to be accounted for.
Let me tell you, it really sucks resolving merge conflicts.
January 20, 2026 at 5:51 PM
I really do love the spec style syntax for tests (describe, before each, it). When used correctly it's the best at representing test setups and expressing test intent.
I also recognize it has many downsides that have to be accounted for.
Let me tell you, it really sucks resolving merge conflicts.
I also recognize it has many downsides that have to be accounted for.
Let me tell you, it really sucks resolving merge conflicts.
Reposted by dreadwail
Yes, that's the main problem in our industry.
January 18, 2026 at 12:33 PM
Yes, that's the main problem in our industry.
Reposted by dreadwail
And, of course, there'll be the folks who warn about mythical developers "wasting time" making the software "too good".
January 18, 2026 at 12:33 PM
And, of course, there'll be the folks who warn about mythical developers "wasting time" making the software "too good".
Reposted by dreadwail
As our civilisation relies ever more critically on software, we've collectively decided this would be a good time to lower our standards?
January 18, 2026 at 11:52 AM
As our civilisation relies ever more critically on software, we've collectively decided this would be a good time to lower our standards?
Reposted by dreadwail
You call it "over-engineering" when devs make software more complicated than it needs to be.
But simpler solutions often require *more* thought. Complexity's easy. You just keep typing.
That's why I call over-complicating "under-engineering".
But simpler solutions often require *more* thought. Complexity's easy. You just keep typing.
That's why I call over-complicating "under-engineering".
January 16, 2026 at 8:50 AM
You call it "over-engineering" when devs make software more complicated than it needs to be.
But simpler solutions often require *more* thought. Complexity's easy. You just keep typing.
That's why I call over-complicating "under-engineering".
But simpler solutions often require *more* thought. Complexity's easy. You just keep typing.
That's why I call over-complicating "under-engineering".
Reposted by dreadwail
Dear product folks who may be wondering what a *complete* software specification looks like, I recommend taking a look on GitHub. It's full of them.
January 15, 2026 at 5:49 AM
Dear product folks who may be wondering what a *complete* software specification looks like, I recommend taking a look on GitHub. It's full of them.
Reposted by dreadwail
The solution is the same now as it always was: SLOW DOWN.
Take smaller steps - no, *smaller* than that! (No, even SMALLER than that!) - and test, inspect, refactor and merge more often.
No, *more* often than that...
etc
Take smaller steps - no, *smaller* than that! (No, even SMALLER than that!) - and test, inspect, refactor and merge more often.
No, *more* often than that...
etc
January 13, 2026 at 5:28 AM
The solution is the same now as it always was: SLOW DOWN.
Take smaller steps - no, *smaller* than that! (No, even SMALLER than that!) - and test, inspect, refactor and merge more often.
No, *more* often than that...
etc
Take smaller steps - no, *smaller* than that! (No, even SMALLER than that!) - and test, inspect, refactor and merge more often.
No, *more* often than that...
etc
Reposted by dreadwail
I'm sorry, I'm calling it. The software industry has lost it's fucking mind.
January 3, 2026 at 10:32 PM
I'm sorry, I'm calling it. The software industry has lost it's fucking mind.
Reposted by dreadwail
The world Silicon Valley has created is exhausting and terrible. We absolutely need better technology, but in the meantime it’s absolutely right to reject what doesn’t serve us and reassess our relationship to digital technology more broadly.
disconnect.blog/we-need-to-r...
disconnect.blog/we-need-to-r...
December 31, 2025 at 8:50 PM
The world Silicon Valley has created is exhausting and terrible. We absolutely need better technology, but in the meantime it’s absolutely right to reject what doesn’t serve us and reassess our relationship to digital technology more broadly.
disconnect.blog/we-need-to-r...
disconnect.blog/we-need-to-r...
Reposted by dreadwail
The Planning Game in XP has a rule: if Johnny reckons he can do it quicker than Jane, then Johnny just volunteered to do it.
If your CEO/CTO/Head of Engineering comes back to the office on Monday and says "2 weeks?! I could do it in 2 hours using Cursor!", hand them the keyboard and wish them luck.
If your CEO/CTO/Head of Engineering comes back to the office on Monday and says "2 weeks?! I could do it in 2 hours using Cursor!", hand them the keyboard and wish them luck.
January 2, 2026 at 5:43 AM
The Planning Game in XP has a rule: if Johnny reckons he can do it quicker than Jane, then Johnny just volunteered to do it.
If your CEO/CTO/Head of Engineering comes back to the office on Monday and says "2 weeks?! I could do it in 2 hours using Cursor!", hand them the keyboard and wish them luck.
If your CEO/CTO/Head of Engineering comes back to the office on Monday and says "2 weeks?! I could do it in 2 hours using Cursor!", hand them the keyboard and wish them luck.
Reposted by dreadwail
News flash: MIT rediscovers coupling and cohesion and the idea of a well-structured distribution of responsibilities.
This sounds like it meshes very closely with an idea I had about "atomic development", which I keep meaning to write up, as well as possibly this one - news.mit.edu/2025/mit-res...
MIT researchers propose a new model for legible, modular software
A new MIT CSAIL approach breaks software systems into “concepts,” or individual pieces designed to do one job, and “synchronizations,” or explicit rules that describe how those pieces fit together. Th...
news.mit.edu
December 31, 2025 at 3:57 PM
News flash: MIT rediscovers coupling and cohesion and the idea of a well-structured distribution of responsibilities.
Reposted by dreadwail
I get it. The boss is asking for an estimate. And you're thinking "But there are so many variables".
Pro tip: the answer is 12.
12 what?
Well, that's their problem.
Pro tip: the answer is 12.
12 what?
Well, that's their problem.
December 30, 2025 at 9:22 PM
I get it. The boss is asking for an estimate. And you're thinking "But there are so many variables".
Pro tip: the answer is 12.
12 what?
Well, that's their problem.
Pro tip: the answer is 12.
12 what?
Well, that's their problem.
Reposted by dreadwail
2040: what was the AI revolution of the 2020s like, in 10 seconds
another robot highlight for 2025: man wearing humanoid mocap suit kicks himself in the balls
December 27, 2025 at 6:24 PM
2040: what was the AI revolution of the 2020s like, in 10 seconds
Reposted by dreadwail
As 2025 draws to a close, my hopes "AI" was going to force more teams to address the real bottlenecks in development fade into the distance.
95% will just ship less reliable software, and take longer and spend more £ doing it. And users will be coerced into eating the costs.
Business as usual.
95% will just ship less reliable software, and take longer and spend more £ doing it. And users will be coerced into eating the costs.
Business as usual.
December 24, 2025 at 9:09 AM
As 2025 draws to a close, my hopes "AI" was going to force more teams to address the real bottlenecks in development fade into the distance.
95% will just ship less reliable software, and take longer and spend more £ doing it. And users will be coerced into eating the costs.
Business as usual.
95% will just ship less reliable software, and take longer and spend more £ doing it. And users will be coerced into eating the costs.
Business as usual.
Reposted by dreadwail
Imagine how much progress we could make if our profession wasn't expected to reinvent software engineering from scratch every 5 years.
December 23, 2025 at 9:35 AM
Imagine how much progress we could make if our profession wasn't expected to reinvent software engineering from scratch every 5 years.
Reposted by dreadwail
2025 was the year when demand for "pre-AI" software developers started to pick up.
Will 2026 be the year when demand grows for devs who don't use it at all?
Will 2026 be the year when demand grows for devs who don't use it at all?
December 23, 2025 at 1:21 PM
2025 was the year when demand for "pre-AI" software developers started to pick up.
Will 2026 be the year when demand grows for devs who don't use it at all?
Will 2026 be the year when demand grows for devs who don't use it at all?
Reposted by dreadwail
I don’t know how anyone can still talk about “the AI revolution” with a straight face. Reuters story about a railroad company that has sunk $300,000 into “developing AI products” and appears to have made…a chatbot that doesn’t work?
archive.is/2025.12.17-0...
archive.is/2025.12.17-0...
December 21, 2025 at 3:14 AM
I don’t know how anyone can still talk about “the AI revolution” with a straight face. Reuters story about a railroad company that has sunk $300,000 into “developing AI products” and appears to have made…a chatbot that doesn’t work?
archive.is/2025.12.17-0...
archive.is/2025.12.17-0...
Reposted by dreadwail
2025 will be marked by me as the year we learned just how much long-term operational damage organisations are prepared to inflict on themselves in pursuit of a growth narrative that's already been quite effectively debunked.
December 22, 2025 at 7:30 AM
2025 will be marked by me as the year we learned just how much long-term operational damage organisations are prepared to inflict on themselves in pursuit of a growth narrative that's already been quite effectively debunked.
Reposted by dreadwail
When men refer to themselves as "alpha males", I hear that in the context of software, where alpha versions are unstable, missing important features, filled with flaws, and not fit for the public.
December 16, 2025 at 1:04 PM
When men refer to themselves as "alpha males", I hear that in the context of software, where alpha versions are unstable, missing important features, filled with flaws, and not fit for the public.
Reposted by dreadwail
I wonder if the software industry will come back to its senses in 2026. 3 years is a long time to waste chasing ghosts.
December 17, 2025 at 11:57 AM
I wonder if the software industry will come back to its senses in 2026. 3 years is a long time to waste chasing ghosts.
Reposted by dreadwail
Watch software developers. I mean *really* watch them.
When they say they spent an hour "writing code", they've actually spent most of that hour *reading* code and *thinking* about it.
Wanna boost your dev productivity?
* Write code that's easier to understand
* Get better at understanding code
When they say they spent an hour "writing code", they've actually spent most of that hour *reading* code and *thinking* about it.
Wanna boost your dev productivity?
* Write code that's easier to understand
* Get better at understanding code
December 15, 2025 at 8:25 AM
Watch software developers. I mean *really* watch them.
When they say they spent an hour "writing code", they've actually spent most of that hour *reading* code and *thinking* about it.
Wanna boost your dev productivity?
* Write code that's easier to understand
* Get better at understanding code
When they say they spent an hour "writing code", they've actually spent most of that hour *reading* code and *thinking* about it.
Wanna boost your dev productivity?
* Write code that's easier to understand
* Get better at understanding code
Reposted by dreadwail
If by some miracle the whole AI industry falls apart because some tech bros decided to spend trillions on compute without spending maybe tens of millions a year on licensing art, I will laugh so hard I'll be in danger of a ruptured spleen.
The OpenAI ruling writers should know about 👀 (if your work was scraped for LLM training, this affects you). www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/bus...
OpenAI Loses Key Discovery Battle as It Cedes Ground to Authors in AI Lawsuits
The issue has been a major battleground in discovery. OpenAI could be on the hook for hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars if it was aware it was infringing on copyrighted material.
www.hollywoodreporter.com
November 29, 2025 at 1:02 PM
If by some miracle the whole AI industry falls apart because some tech bros decided to spend trillions on compute without spending maybe tens of millions a year on licensing art, I will laugh so hard I'll be in danger of a ruptured spleen.
Reposted by dreadwail
