Mikon

We've redesigned Claude Code on desktop. You can now run multiple Claude sessions side by side from one window, with a new sidebar to manage them all.

Every time I see a tweet saying “I can vibe code this in a weekend” - I think of the slack notification system.. It takes time, persistence and effort to get the details right. Sure, a lot of simple workflows will get vibe coded away. And maybe you can put this in Claude Code and get the code right in one shot. But quality, depth and great systems will still have value and take time. You can’t vibe code lessons. Now and forever.

A father’s early-life trauma may leave biological traces in his sperm that could influence how his children’s brains develop. New research published in Molecular Psychiatry suggests that childhood stress can have lasting effects at a molecular level. In a study of 58 men, scientists found that those who experienced adversity in early life showed distinct epigenetic patterns—chemical modifications that regulate gene activity without altering the DNA sequence. These changes were located near genes involved in brain development, indicating that a man’s past experiences may be reflected in his reproductive cells long into adulthood. Notably, these patterns appeared independent of common lifestyle factors such as smoking or alcohol use. The study identified differences in DNA methylation and small noncoding RNA, both of which play roles in gene regulation. However, researchers caution that it is still unclear how these markers are passed to offspring or what effects they may ultimately have. While the findings are preliminary, they point to a broader understanding of inheritance—one where a parent’s environment and life experiences may shape biological outcomes in the next generation. Source: Dickson, D. A., et al. (2024). Paternal childhood adversity and the human sperm epigenome. Molecular Psychiatry.

I am slowly coming around to AI assisted programming. I am genuinely trying to codify every rule about programming that I have and using that + several stages to build out small changes. Not sure the productivity changes, but I think I can see a modest gain in speed. I am also trying to be concerned about every line produced, not just slop trebucheting code over the wall.

Wow

Now at number 9.

I was chatting with my buddy at Google, who's been a tech director there for about 20 years, about their AI adoption. Craziest convo I've had all year. The TL;DR is that Google engineering appears to have the same AI adoption footprint as John Deere, the tractor company. Most of the industry has the same internal adoption curve: 20% agentic power users, 20% outright refusers, 60% still using Cursor or equivalent chat tool. It turns out Google has this curve too. But why is Google so... average? How is it that a handful of companies are taking off like a spaceship, and the rest, including Google, are mired in inaction? My buddy's observation was key here: There has been an industry-wide hiring freeze for 18+ months, during which time nobody has been moving jobs. So there are no clued-in people coming in from the outside to tell Google how far behind they are, how utterly mediocre they have become as an eng org. He says the problem is that they can't use Claude Code because it's the enemy, and Gemini has never been good enough to capture people's workflows like Claude has, so basically agentic coding just never really took off inside Google. They're all just plodding along, completely oblivious to what's happening out there right now. Not only is Google not able to do anything about it, they don't seem to be aware of the problem at all. I'm having major flashbacks to fifty years ago as a kid at the La Brea Tar Pits, asking, "why can't they just climb out?" My Google friend and I had this conversation over a month ago. I didn't share it because I wanted to look around a bit, and see if it's really as bad as all that. I've been talking to people from dozens of companies since then. And yeah. It's as bad as all that. Google is about average. Some companies at the bottom have near-zero AI adoption and can't even get budget for AI. They may have moats and high walls, but the horde is coming for them all the same. And then there are a few companies I've met recently who are *amazingly* leaned in to AI adoption. One category-leader company just cancelled IntelliJ for a thousand engineers. That's an incredibly bold move, one of many they're making towards agentic adoption. In my opinion, that company is setting themselves up for a _huge_ W. As for the rest, well, it's the Great Siloing. Everyone's flying blind. With nobody moving companies, no company knows where they stand on the AI adoption curve. Nobody knows how they're doing compared to everyone else. Half of them just check a box: "We enabled {Copilot/Cursor} for everyone!" Cue smug celebrations. They think this is like getting SOC2 compliance, just a thing they turn on and now it's "solved." And they don't realize that they've done effectively nothing at all. All because of a hiring freeze.

CBS News: President Trump says he’s not a big fan of conservative activist and swimmer Riley Gaines who campaigns against the participation of trans women in women's sports. Trump: “I didn’t listen to Riley Gaines. I’m not a big fan of Riley actually.”