I also got a bad impression from that, but upon further reflection, it's a more interesting choice. Keeping the plug port in the trunk means that the charging cable (kept in the trunk) can stay semi-permanently plugged into the car, which is perhaps nice when you're charging away from home. The question I have is, because the cable goes through a cut-out in the trunk to reach the charger, how well that holds up to rain, attempts to break into the trunk, etc.
I tend to take an open-ended sabbatical every few years. I took one in 2017 and now again in 2025. It’s not a full year off; for me, it usually lasts around three to six months. That feels like the right rhythm, given that the traditional idea of a sabbatical is taking one year off every seven years. What made the biggest difference, though, was the open-ended nature of it, not having a strict return date. A fixed six-week break wouldn’t really feel like a sabbatical to me.
The company is being rebranded, not the product. Makes total sense, considering the brand equity, and also them going in the direction of productivity suite. Could be interesting.
1. The option to leave an email for those who are interested is a huge plus, obviously without forcing it in any way. Maybe I should word it differently.
2. I’m not suggesting just slapping logos on the site, which has become the norm these days even if someone only tried the product once. But seeing an endorsement from someone like Mitchell Hashimoto on ampcode.com is a plus for me.
3. Yes, “visible founders” can absolutely backfire if it becomes performative or ego-driven. But handled with humility and substance, founder presence can actually accelerate trust-building.
This came from watching a lot of promising devtools get early traction, then stall when trust signals weren’t consistent. Would love to hear how others think about earning developer trust without over-marketing it.
Exactly this. I’ve spent some time last week at a 50 something people web agency helping them setup QA process where agents explore the paths and based on those passes write automated scripts that humans verify and put into testing flow.
For whatever you think, this is well written and equipped piece of writing. But on the topic at hand, one could also think this whole drama is orchestrated by marketing. :)
This whole article reads like pre AI thinking. Mentinoning briefly AI in intro is not enough. IMO the really interesting issue, considering our AI future, won’t be discovering your values through introspection, it's figuring out how to translate human values into mathematical constraints that don't immediately get gamed by optimizers. On the other hand, core validator questions are actually pretty solid, especially the "does the inverse strike a nerve" test.
Nice to see this out there! Been playing with the token efficiency, looks like around 10% savings vs regular JSON/YAML. Not massive but it adds up. The embedded code thing is cool. Tired of configs that need weird templating or scripts all over the place just to do basic logic. Will check this out on some projects.
reply