Sean Goedecke argues that domain expertise is the real prompting skill. He's describing two quantities as one: a floor, available to anyone who can describe what acceptance looks like, and a gain that multiplies whatever you bring.
Xberg 1.0 has been released. Xberg is a document extraction engine, describing itself as a "document intelligence framework." It's written in Rust, with fifteen generated language bindings, and a very descriptive data model that provides a *lot* of flexibility.
There's no standard for marking AI contribution, and there can't be, because contribution isn't a scalar. What readers actually want is attestation, and that's what a byline always was. The question was never whether a machine touched the text. It's whether anyone was behind the controls.
Baldur Bjarnason argues that development tools win by making developers replaceable. The JVM ran that experiment three times, against Visual Basic's precedent, through EJB's committee, and into Spring's reversal, and the results say his theory is exactly half of a whole.
Imran Nazar recreated a JavaScript animation demo on 1982 hardware and wrote up every decision along the way: 6510 assembler, fixed-point math with no floating point available, a CPU bug turned into a cosine lookup. When he lands at 30fps, he can tell you exactly why without running it. It's very cool.
An essay from the creator of Primate argues that the JavaScript ecosystem traded cohesion for composition and has been paying for the seams ever since. The diagnosis reaches well past JavaScript: Java's own graveyard of JSF and GWT proves the seam problem is universal, and WebAssembly is about to make the question unavoidable for everyone.
Andi Roberts wrote up Alex Pentland's research on why some teams outperform others. The research is good; the practical advice mostly assumes a watercooler you may not have. Some additions from the trenches: what Brooks actually said, two cheap levers for building the idea flow, and when you want the opposite.
Reader Hideki Idoru argues that AI is a decent information distiller and a bad tool for nearly everything else in software, because no one can cheaply verify that generated code is correct. The deeper claim is that most programming was already trivial, unabstracted busywork, and AI has only torn the mask off. It's worth reading and thinking about.
Ray Myers wrote up the Bun rewrite and the fight around it. It's emotional in places, but there's real signal in it about how agentic work is sold versus how it's done, and one review technique worth stealing.