Jason Gorman

Yes, the same one. Moved to a different instance.

Software development trainer, coach and practitioner through my company Codemanship.

Wax on. Wax off.

Business: https://www.codemanship.co.uk

Public Key

npub18dmnux54n6zj3pm8yg9qqx68w22cjxfpu8j39y5xppwcvzq4hehshmau9h

NIP-05 Address

jasongorman_at_mstdn.business@momostr.pink

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsrkae7r22eapfgsanjyzsqrdrh99vfrys7regjj2rqshvxpq2mumcprpmhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumt0d4hhxarj9ecxjmntqy28wumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnyv9kh2uewd9hsruwdw4

Publishing to

relay.momostr.pink

relay.damus.io

saltivka.org

Author Public Key

npub18dmnux54n6zj3pm8yg9qqx68w22cjxfpu8j39y5xppwcvzq4hehshmau9h

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-09-14 05:33:03 UTC

LLMs have no capacity for temporal reasoning (A happens before B etc). This makes them inadequate for detecting bugs in concurrent logic like race conditions and deadlocks.
Apply proven traditional techniques - like static analysis, model checking, or, y'know, thinking - where possible.

2026-09-11 05:21:54 UTC

"Gone are the days when developers just wrote syntax"
Yeah, I miss not having to think about semantics.

2026-08-31 07:02:41 UTC

AI-assisted productivity claims are like reports of ghosts, flying saucers and Big Foot - the better the evidence, the less sensational the claim.

2026-08-30 22:22:22 UTC

If you told me I had to go back to using the software I relied on 30 years ago, but running on today's hardware, I'd take that deal.

2026-08-28 16:21:05 UTC

My London-based client is looking for a senior software engineer with Extreme Programming experience on the JVM - ideally in Kotlin.
Established Open Source start-up with real customers and US backing, working on developer tools you may have heard of.
Salary range: £90K-£120K.
Hybrid, 2 days/week on site in central London.
You must be eligible to work in the UK.

2026-08-27 04:47:09 UTC

It has *always* been true that - in terms of bang-for-buck - smaller dev teams are usually more productive than larger teams. Fred Brooks wrote about this in 1975.
To attribute this to "AI" betrays your lack of understanding of software development fundamentals.

2026-08-26 08:27:03 UTC

If you're interested in the design of agentic workflows, remember this formula:
R = 1 - (1 - P)(1 - C)
https://files.mstdn.business/media_attachments/files/117/160/856/243/105/036/original/dd937a4714266f3a.png

2026-08-20 17:55:52 UTC

Snr software engineer. London-based. Hybrid 2 days a week on site. XP practices, and we mean it. JVM experience - Kotlin preferred. OSS - tools developers use. 90-120K a year.

2026-08-18 17:14:16 UTC

My UK client is looking for a snr software engineer with XP experience on the JVM - Kotlin preferred but not essential.
£90K-£120K.
Not a bank. Not a blockchain something something. Established start-up with actual customers like in the old days.
OSS tools that developers use.

2026-08-18 06:47:26 UTC

I've worked with and spoken to hundreds of developers over the last year, and my best guess is that the true extent of AI use in software development is being massively exaggerated.
I'm determined to get to the bottom of this before the year's out.

2026-08-18 05:51:05 UTC

What if I told you there's a way to 10x the productivity of a software development team without making any improvements to their process?
Tackle problems that are 10x as valuable.
Strangely, that option is rarely on the table.

2026-08-17 19:43:32 UTC

My London-based client is looking for a senior software engineer with XP experience on the JVM - Kotlin preferred but not essential.
£90K-£120K. Hybrid 2 days a week on site.
Not a bank. Not a blockchain something something. Established start-up with actual customers like in the old days.
OSS tools that developers use.

2026-08-16 08:26:07 UTC

Quick note to clarify that the senior software engineer role - based 2 days/week in London and requiring good XP experience - that my client has asked me to seek candidates for really is based in London 2 days/week and really does require good XP experience.

2026-08-07 06:47:31 UTC

Bear in mind when you ask an LLM to explain why it did what it did (or didn't), you're asking faces on toast to explain faces on toast.
It's not explaining. It's plausibly completing.
And you fell for it twice.

2026-08-04 21:15:05 UTC

So we've had "Barbenheimer". What will this summer's blockbusters be abbreviated to?

2026-08-01 07:23:14 UTC

I've been arguing for many years that the team is the real product of software development, learning is the real outcome, and that organisations need to optimise for *that*
Software, and its impact in the real world, is an ephemeral byproduct of learning.
But teams aren't usually seen as an asset by management. When the software's shipped, orgs will often throw away the toy and play with the box.

2026-07-31 06:12:17 UTC

- reply

Counter-intuitively, many teams could accelerate learning by *slowing down* execution

2026-07-31 06:11:20 UTC

- reply

Folks mistakenly believe feedback latency to be about how long it takes to get feedback. It's actually about how far ahead of feedback execution happens - how many unanswered questions are in progress? How many questions never get answers?
How much do we build on top of untested guesses?
Ship more and ship faster without accelerating real-world feedback, signal-to-noise in the feedback degrades and *learning* slows down.

2026-07-31 06:06:25 UTC

The original sin of software development
https://files.mstdn.business/media_attachments/files/117/013/084/601/208/918/original/52c382fbf67db5ae.png

2026-07-31 05:36:24 UTC

- reply

When prices reflect 100%+ of the real costs, bottom lines aren't moving, and teams are delivering worse software later in return for massive spends, I suspect we'll see what's really "inevitable"

2026-07-31 05:28:13 UTC

One rhetorical trick AI vendors & boosters use to steamroll over concerns - like the lack of demonstrable ROI - is to paint the LLM future as "inevitable".
It doesn't matter that the end product is worse, or that productivity gains are elusive.
Go all-in or "get left behind". It is *inevitable*
In reality, what's *inevitable* is that this technology will have to become profitable in the not-too-distant future.
The CFO has entered the chat, and we have no good answers for them.