>> just aren't good for end to end agentic workflows.

This is (apparently) the conceit of SteveYegge / GasTown - no model can cope unassisted so chunk it up, run it and if it falls over remember the exact place and restart, merging it all in

But that’s not my point.

I believe that software is a new form of literacy and just as all Companies and societies are literate now, in the future (tm) companies will run exclusively on software - AI developed software and those who go all out will have the sort of advantages the Catholic Church had over .. guilds?

Anyhow, that’s me being AI optimist. But writing the code is going to be a small part of that transition - almost everything to do with LLMs that is claimed amazing (Computer vision is something else) - almost everything people say we need an LLM is stuff you could have done three years ago but your internal politics just would not let you. Oh look we can see if our policies are being met (you could have written the policies in code and solved the whole problem)

Im struggling to get it out but - almost everything AI is proposed for is stuff a well run engineering firm coukd have taken on. A software literate firm could have done without AI is where firms are hoping AI will Get them

Imagine how far ahead real software literate firms will be - as long as they don’t burn their runway in tokens

Which is why, the right play imo is still buy in-house as much as possible, engineer around the problems and explore the phase space at marginal Cost.

Then and only then think frontier models.