Start by having the agent ask you questions until it has enough information to create a plan.
Use the agent to create the plan.
Follow the plan.
When I started, I had to look at the code pretty frequently. Rather than fix it myself, I spent time thinking about what I could change in my prompts or workflow.
How many hours have you spent writing code? Thousands? Tens of thousands? Were you able to achieve good results in the first hundred hours?
Now, compare it to how much time you've spent working with agents. Did you dedicate considerable time to figuring out how to use them? Do you stop using the agent and do things manually when it isn't going right, or do you spend time figuring out how to get the agent to do it?
I create a feature branch, do the work and let it commit. I check the code as I go. If I don't like it, then I revert to a previous commit. Other times I write some code that it isn't getting right for whatever reason.
For Workday, use a very simple resume. No columns, no bullet points (use asterisks), no tables.
There's usually an option to upload another file near the end of the form. After it has filled in the fields using your plain resume, delete it and upload the nicer one.
I'm a DevOps/infrastructure person, and I agree completely. This article won't change that.
They've been great for helping me with work-related tasks. It's like having a knowledgeable co-worker with infinite patience, and nothing better to do. Neither the people nor the LLM give back perfect answers every time, but it's usually more than enough to get me to the next step.
That said, having good domain knowledge helps a lot. You make fewer mistakes, and you ask better questions.
When I use LLMs for tasks I don't know much about, it takes me a lot longer than someone who does know. I think a lot of people - not just infrastructure people - are missing out by not learning how to use LLMs effectively.
I switched to Linux earlier this year. I was a little worried about which games wouldn't work, and I didn't need to worry.
The Steam client works just fine, although I do have to "force compatibility" and choose Proton. So far the games have played fine, including big games like Cyberpunk 2077.
For non-Steam, I'm using the Heroic Game Launcher, and it works great. I'm not missing any games, and I certainly don't miss the Windows BS.
Nobody in any kind of business uses @gmail.com. Maybe some Etsy person selling out of their extra bedroom, but that's it.
Domain names and email hosting is too cheap to use gmail for business. Even if it was a legit business, I'd stay away if they couldn't be bothered to do that minimum.
Huh. I use Rackspace for email, not Hosted Exchange, just email. Haven't had a burp. Been using it for well over a decade with no problem.
I didn't know that the CEO got replaced a couple of months ago. Given the way they're handling this particular problem I may just go looking for someone else, just in case.
That said, they seem to work best when they're part of an overall interview process. I think it's a mistake to look at only the highest scores and interview those people, they should only weed out the bottom scores and follow a more typical (do they fit? can they learn it?) process for the rest.
I've been using Nomad for my "toy" network, and I like it. It runs many services, and a few periodic jobs. Lightweight, easy to set up, and has enough depth to handle some of the weirder stuff.
I've known about ArduPilot for a long time, never even heard of HoverflyOpen. The only reference I found for HoverflyOpen is this:
https://www.parallax.com/product/31500
Comparing that to the ArduBee isn't really much of a comparison. The only advantage I see is that HoverflyOpen currently exists, while ArduBee looks like they are still in the preparing-to-Kickstart phase.
If there's more out there for HoverflyOpen, please share it. I'll admit I didn't dig around much.
ArduPilot is a well-known and battle-tested platform.
Start by having the agent ask you questions until it has enough information to create a plan.
Use the agent to create the plan.
Follow the plan.
When I started, I had to look at the code pretty frequently. Rather than fix it myself, I spent time thinking about what I could change in my prompts or workflow.