As a non-believer I am worried what will he do to us.

> aren’t most creation myths actually strikingly similar in terms of overall themes

Like any other product, someone invented it first, and others followed/copied. Over thousands of years, religions evolved separately, but you can still find traces of a shared origin running through them all.

So apparently it’s not your lifetime, it’s the lifetime of the software version. If you never upgrade then it could be your lifetime.

It's always the lifetime of the version or the lifetime of the software, never your lifetime.

By lifetime I mean you can use it as long as you like without having to pay again. So it depends on how you get the software, if it’s web based then yes there may be a lifetime of the software but if you install it on your machine then you will stop getting bug fixes or security updates at some point but software itself won’t stop working until your hardware dies.

seems like the 1 person unicorn will be a reality soon :-)

Similar to how some domain name sellers acquire desirable domains to resell at a higher price, agent providers might exploit your success by hijacking your project once it gains attraction.

Doesn't seem likely. If tools allow a single person to create a full-fledged product and support it etc - millions of those will pop up over night.

Thats the issue with AI - it doesn't give you any competitive advantage as everyone has it == no one has it. The entry bar is so low kids can do it.

/ :-(

This isn’t a new phenomenon and not limited to software development. Companies know that people get trained and leave all the time. Most companies have plans for that.

The answer used to be pensions, reasonable reliable raises, and promotion from within. Workers are responding to the signals sent by companies, the way to make the best money is bouncing around every few years to get actual raises, so that's what a lot of people do.

Was intrigued by reading the title but was disappointed immediately after seeing that this has nothing to do with TypeScript.

Same here, the title even says "TypeScript" not "Typescript" but whatever.

I think what's somehow interesting about this is in the footer of the page:

    Autonomously crafted in 15m 4s by Leap.new

Could be some form of advertisement (with a click-baity title too? wouldn't be surprised if that also was AI-generated).

The titles been changed, still show hn’s that don’t have the OP in here explaining what they did feel a little soulless.

For me the most annoying one is the cookie consent banner. Very few sites have clearly defined buttons like “Allow all” “Deny all” etc. but majority of them have a (intentionally) convoluted UI so that a lot of users just accept all.

I frankly wish the web standards group had released an API for these so they could be handled at the browser level.

We've had multiple standards, mostly recently https://www.w3.org/TR/gpc/ . They always fail, because they're never mandatory, so surveillance capitalists just decline to implement them – or, worse, quietly sabotage them.

Isn't outsourcing has been happening for decades?

soon there will be AI debates. Different models debating with each other on a topic

I think the gmail assistant example is completely wrong. Just because you have AI you shouldn’t use it for whatever you want. You can, but it would be counter productive. Why would anyone use AI to write a simple email like that!? I would use AI if I have to write a large email with complex topic. Using AI for a small thing is like using a car to go to a place you can literally walk in less than a couple minutes.

> Why would anyone use AI to write a simple email like that!?

Pete and I discussed this when we were going over an earlier draft of his article. You're right, of course—when the prompt is harder to write than the actual email, AI is overkill at best.

The way I understand it is that it's the email reading example which is actually the motivated one. If you scroll a page or so down to "A better email assistant", that's the proof-of-concept widget showing what an actually useful AI-powered email client might look like.

The email writing examples are there because that's the "horseless carriage" that actually exists right now in Gmail/Gemini integration.