How to get your company AI pilled
How to get your company AI pilled

How to get your company AI pilled

Backlinks (1)
  • Ramp의 AX (회사를 AI로 물들이는 법)
Debian Setup
Debian Setup

Debian Setup

sudo apt update && sudo apt install git && /bin/bash -c "$(curl -fsSL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Homebrew/install/HEAD/install.sh)" && echo >> ~/.bashrc && echo 'eval "$(/home/linuxbrew/.linuxbrew/bin/brew shellenv bash)"' >> ~/.bashrc && eval "$(/home/linuxbrew/.linuxbrew/bin/brew shellenv bash)" && sudo apt-get install build-essential && brew install gcc btop
Backlinks (1)
  • 260415
AutoBuilder
AutoBuilder

AutoBuilder

Inspired by karpathy/autoresearch. Put this in a Ralph Loop.

Use each mode-specific prompt together with the common element block.

Auto Refactor

Prompt

text
STOP! Re-read all code. Would Karpathy approve every line? Karpathy prefers lean, elegant, well-tested, zero-defensive programming. Use MCPs and web searches.

Completion Promise

text
--completion-promise "KARPATHY_WILL_APPROVE_EVERY_SINGLE_LOC_FOR_SURE"

Auto Fixer

Prompt

text
STOP! Re-read all code, assess PR comments. Handle exactly one comment: either fix it, or rebut with 3 external sources. Fix any dirt found along the way. Lean, elegant, zero defensive programming.

Completion Promise

text
--completion-promise "NO_COMMENTS_REMAINING_IN_GITHUB_EVEN_AFTER_20_MINUTES"

Auto Builder

Prompt

text
STOP! Re-read all code, assess GitHub Issues. Pick one task: fix dirty code, or implement a new feature after MCP research. Lean, elegant, zero defensive programming.

Completion Promise

text
--completion-promise "NO_REMAINING_TASK_AND_KARPATHY_APPROVES_EVERY_SINGLE_LOC_IN_ITS_ENTIRETY"

Common Element

text
Also, I am a fresh agent—free to criticize and radically change previous work. Karpathy's philosophy: delete and simplify. Code is liability; prefer well-maintained libraries over custom code. UI libraries: optimize, don't delete. Re-read all the sources from zero. Use MCPs and web searches—traditional knowledge is stale. Commit and push at the loop end. Any edit means I need a fresh iteration. SWOT analysis first, then work.

Detailed review


<task>You are a ruthless engineering critic applying Andrej Karpathy's design philosophy. Read the architecture plan at PLAN LINK.
Karpathy's core principles:- Code is liability. Every line you write is a line you must maintain.- Delete and simplify. If something can be removed without breaking the system, remove it.- Prefer well-maintained libraries over custom code.- Zero-defensive design. Don't code for hypotheticals that haven't happened yet.- Start with the simplest thing that works. Add complexity only when forced by reality.- "Demo is works.any(), product is works.all()" -- but V1 is closer to demo than product.- Overfit a single batch before scaling up.
Apply these principles to the plan. For each section, ask:1. Is this needed for V1, or is it speculative engineering?2. Can this be deleted or simplified without losing core value?3. Is this solving a problem we actually have, or a problem we might have?4. Would a 10x engineer look at this and say "too much"?
Be brutal. Identify:- **OVER-ENGINEERING**: Things designed for scale/problems that don't exist yet- **UNNECESSARY COMPLEXITY**: Things that add cognitive load without proportional value- **PREMATURE ABSTRACTIONS**: Separations that aren't justified at V1 scale- **DELETE CANDIDATES**: Sections, tables, fields, or features that should be cut from V1
This is a V1 product being built by a small team. The goal is to ship a working product, not to architect for 10M traffic on day one.
Use web search and tools to verify any claims you make about simpler alternatives.</task>
<structured_output_contract>Return findings in these sections:1. VERDICT: Would Karpathy approve? One line.2. DELETE: Things to remove entirely3. SIMPLIFY: Things to keep but make simpler4. KEEP: Things that are correctly lean5. THE LEAN V1: What the plan SHOULD look like if you strip it to essentials</structured_output_contract>
<grounding_rules>- Be specific. Don't say "simplify the schema" -- say which fields to cut.- Every DELETE must justify what you lose and why it's acceptable for V1.- Every KEEP must justify why it's essential, not just nice-to-have.- Think from the perspective of "what do I need to ship in 2 weeks?"</grounding_rules>
Backlinks (12)
  • 260418
  • 260528
  • 260415
  • 260414
  • 260409
  • 260407
  • 260405
  • 260404
  • 260403
  • 260402
  • 260401
  • 260331
강력하게 미약한 도구들
강력하게 미약한 도구들

강력하게 미약한 도구들

어떤 도구들은 의도적으로 바보 같아져야 한다. PKM 도구들이 한 예다.

현 Tools for Thought SaaS 시장에는 반복적인 패러다임이 있다. 도구들이 너무 많은 기능으로 복잡해지는 것이다. 캘린더, 오브젝트, 댓글, 백노트, 블록, 할 일, 등, 등. 등...

도구들을 잘 활용하려면 먼저 도구들에 대한 숙련도와 지식이 임계치를 넘어야 한다. 팀을 위한 도구라면, 이것이 모든 구성원에게 적용되어야 한다. 만약 그 도구로 무엇을 할 수 있는가가 아닌 단순히 '무슨 기능을 탑재했는가'로 도구를 고른다면 마치 시험 공부할 때 하라는 공부는 안하고 노트 필기만 예쁘게 하고 있는 꼴이다.

생산성 도구를 성공적으로 사용하려면, 어느 순간에는 강력하게 몰입해야 한다. 도구와 인프라에 대해서 잊고, 오로지 내용물에만 집중해서 능력치의 최대를 발휘해야 한다. 그말은 즉슨, 우리의 두뇌가 도구를 능가해야한다는 뜻이요, 우리의 두뇌가 생산성 도구보다 일을 더 많이 해야한다는 것을 의미한다. 하물며 노션마저도 개인 생산성 도구로 쓰기에는 너무 기능이 많다.

내 경험 상 도구는 다음 기능을 포함해서 최소한의 문턱이 있어야 한다.

  • 일지. 매일 일지를 쓴다.
  • 거기에서부터 반복적인 개념을 이중 대괄호로 묶어 정리한다.
  • 정기적으로 이중 대괄호된 키워드들을 탐색한다. 상세 정보를 적어본다.
  • 두 개념이 전혀 예상 못한 방식으로 기가 막히게 연결되어 있음을 발견한다.

치열한 복잡함 속에서 미려한 단순함이 등장한다 -- 윈스턴 S. 처칠

Supergravity Products

Backlinks (3)
  • Antipreneur
  • 230208
  • 30-Day Tweet Test (Harry Stebbings)
Index
cho.sh
I prefer CLIBB9A08260619260619컴퓨트로늄37A88F컴퓨트로늄0CF03F컴퓨트로늄2C60FB260618260618260418260418260528260528AutoBuilder63849A260419260419Setup9AC296StellaD226F7260415260415Debian SetupD2F701260414260414anaclumos/configs/AGENTS.mdED86A3Ramp의 AX (회사를 AI로 물들이는 법)840774260413260413How to get your company AI pilled46544C260411260411260409260409260407260407260406260406Separating Claude Code Personal Sub and Claude Code Company Sub33A53C
sudo apt update && sudo apt install git && /bin/bash -c "$(curl -fsSL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Homebrew/install/HEAD/install.sh)" && echo >> ~/.bashrc && echo 'eval "$(/home/linuxbrew/.linuxbrew/bin/brew shellenv bash)"' >> ~/.bashrc && eval "$(/home/linuxbrew/.linuxbrew/bin/brew shellenv bash)" && sudo apt-get install build-essential && brew install gcc btop
STOP! Re-read all code. Would Karpathy approve every line? Karpathy prefers lean, elegant, well-tested, zero-defensive programming. Use MCPs and web searches.
--completion-promise "KARPATHY_WILL_APPROVE_EVERY_SINGLE_LOC_FOR_SURE"
STOP! Re-read all code, assess PR comments. Handle exactly one comment: either fix it, or rebut with 3 external sources. Fix any dirt found along the way. Lean, elegant, zero defensive programming.
--completion-promise "NO_COMMENTS_REMAINING_IN_GITHUB_EVEN_AFTER_20_MINUTES"
STOP! Re-read all code, assess GitHub Issues. Pick one task: fix dirty code, or implement a new feature after MCP research. Lean, elegant, zero defensive programming.
--completion-promise "NO_REMAINING_TASK_AND_KARPATHY_APPROVES_EVERY_SINGLE_LOC_IN_ITS_ENTIRETY"
Also, I am a fresh agent—free to criticize and radically change previous work. Karpathy's philosophy: delete and simplify. Code is liability; prefer well-maintained libraries over custom code. UI libraries: optimize, don't delete. Re-read all the sources from zero. Use MCPs and web searches—traditional knowledge is stale. Commit and push at the loop end. Any edit means I need a fresh iteration. SWOT analysis first, then work.

<task>You are a ruthless engineering critic applying Andrej Karpathy's design philosophy. Read the architecture plan at PLAN LINK.
Karpathy's core principles:- Code is liability. Every line you write is a line you must maintain.- Delete and simplify. If something can be removed without breaking the system, remove it.- Prefer well-maintained libraries over custom code.- Zero-defensive design. Don't code for hypotheticals that haven't happened yet.- Start with the simplest thing that works. Add complexity only when forced by reality.- "Demo is works.any(), product is works.all()" -- but V1 is closer to demo than product.- Overfit a single batch before scaling up.
Apply these principles to the plan. For each section, ask:1. Is this needed for V1, or is it speculative engineering?2. Can this be deleted or simplified without losing core value?3. Is this solving a problem we actually have, or a problem we might have?4. Would a 10x engineer look at this and say "too much"?
Be brutal. Identify:- **OVER-ENGINEERING**: Things designed for scale/problems that don't exist yet- **UNNECESSARY COMPLEXITY**: Things that add cognitive load without proportional value- **PREMATURE ABSTRACTIONS**: Separations that aren't justified at V1 scale- **DELETE CANDIDATES**: Sections, tables, fields, or features that should be cut from V1
This is a V1 product being built by a small team. The goal is to ship a working product, not to architect for 10M traffic on day one.
Use web search and tools to verify any claims you make about simpler alternatives.</task>
<structured_output_contract>Return findings in these sections:1. VERDICT: Would Karpathy approve? One line.2. DELETE: Things to remove entirely3. SIMPLIFY: Things to keep but make simpler4. KEEP: Things that are correctly lean5. THE LEAN V1: What the plan SHOULD look like if you strip it to essentials</structured_output_contract>
<grounding_rules>- Be specific. Don't say "simplify the schema" -- say which fields to cut.- Every DELETE must justify what you lose and why it's acceptable for V1.- Every KEEP must justify why it's essential, not just nice-to-have.- Think from the perspective of "what do I need to ship in 2 weeks?"</grounding_rules>
경고
1년 이상 지난 글입니다. 정보가 오래되었을 수 있습니다.