All leadership is like that. Even if you're not a people manager.

I'm an IC in a technical leadership position, all of these hold true with the added constraint that I cannot tell anyone what to do. I hold no carrot or stick.

I have to persuade, convince and influence, I have no reports (nor I want them) so to get anything done I need to get people to align and understand the value on its merits.

The good news is those skills of getting people to believe in you and your thing are critical to leadership as an EM too.

I’m sure we all can think of managers who don’t have those skills but rely on the stick, and those managers are lousy at their job.

Good leadership skills have a lot of overlap between IC and EM.

If people follow your direction, it is usually because the argument made sense, the trust was already there or you did the unglamorous work of aligning everyone beforehand

That's always an issue, but the industry seems to be moving away from 2D circuits.

Reducing trace length seems to be the way forward for faster/larger circuits. Signal propagation time on-die is becoming an issue.

Things like Huawei's Logic folding, or TSVs, and so on, attack the issue by reducing signal travel time.

This looks like another building block in that direction.

There's also some push at cooling chips from both sides.

Yeah, but it was probably the right call at the time.

Backward compatibility was a breath of fresh air at a time were code needed constant porting and rewriting. No two machines were alike.

It's one of the reasons the PC became so popular.

Everything is within spec, reproducible builds are not a goal of C/C++.

The compiler builders may take pity on you, but really there's no bug here, just unwarranted expectations.

It's still too unpredictable trying to be transparent IMHO.

Scalarization can fail in surprising ways just due to what a maximal atomic write can be on the target platform, and then it fall back to heap allocated objects.

Even if there's type erasure.

I much rather have the compiler balk at me than let me write something that may or may not work as expected.

The triple click is annoying.

I mean, select the word, then press check, then press continue.

It could be one single click and move to the next, show me my last result at the same time you ask me for the next one.

The influence has spread wide, there's one even in Buenos Aires: https://buenosaires.gob.ar/gcaba_historico/jardinbotanico/la...

I'm trying to figure out exactly how to best use AI, but not just as a chatbot user.

How to integrate it to solve useful problems. Make delightful products.

So many things that used to be intractable now are probabilistically solvable and that needs some things to be changed fundamentally and a lot of assumptions dropped.

The randomness that AI introduces poses a plethora of challenges.

I think local models will be a big thing eventually, not everything needs a frontier model and a lot of useful work can be done with surprisingly little hardware.

I also want to get back to non-LLM models.

It's like the e-everything trend of the 90s.

It's pushing an internal tech detail onto customer faces that only care about a problem being solved.

It's virtue signaling for investors and a usually misguided attempt to look trendy or cool.

It's kinda like that, there could be a proprietary fraud detection heuristic in there that you don't want to get out.