Cursor supports all the Claude file patterns, including plugins and marketplaces. We leverage that to support both Claude and Cursor with same instructions and skills
Not a catch all to fix issues agree with linting. Being very strict with linters has become very cheap with coding agents and it keeps you up to date with code standards and keeps code style homogenous which is very nice when you are reviewing professional code, regardless of who wrote it.
It’s also tricky otherwise if you have to occasionally review lazily written manual code mixed with syntactically formal/clean but functionally incorrect AI code.
In Excel you have goal seek for this functionality. I believe it does some form of numerical solving of the equation system.
Good for every situation when you need to solve equations!
In the context of using spreadsheets I think about solving simple financial or maybe construction/mechanical design problems where you don’t want to solve it manually or program it and a spreadsheet is a quick and useful interface.
This is very different in practice, because it is pervasive rather than something you have to set up for particular cases.
If this was usual it would help a lot with people's tendency to hard code the correct answer rather than fix formulae. Just that aspect of it would be a huge improvement. People do this all the time with simple financial problem, for example.
A lot of what people use spreadsheets for is not all that simple. Again, especially with financial applications. People manage huge amounts of money using horribly complex models implemented in Excel.
I started using keyboard navigation more and more around Win 7 and that has actually improved quite consistently since then and I remember Win 8 Win-key search was quite good, if you could look past the start menu…
The field of AI has become very big in the recent years and people are becoming more and more specialized just like the in the rest of software or R&D. There’s all sorts of model building and development, integration in other traditional software, infrastructure, deployment and devops and now also all the governance and compliance for a lot of fields. It’s good for people working in those stacks to understand the full chain at some level but pretty fast you will have experts in particular parts of the chain and no one will understand it all.
And then there’s of course career climbers playing politics and people getting into the field because of interest or resume building.
So maybe we are talking too much about AI as a tech bubble (like the dotcom bubble) and it is actually closer to an arms race like the nuclear programs or space race? For better and for worse there are a lot of secondary value and ventures created from those and one could see AI ventures in a similar light.
A key difference is of course, at least in the US, that the research is led by corporations as opposed to research institutes and government.
Completely agree. I think this was kind of solved going to university where most of the math courses did not allow calculators and similar tools or books present and the tests were designed to not require these and instead focused on theory and concepts. I think isolating test environments is one thing and then you can in addition have classes or assignments where AI and other tools are available and acceptable to use.
I was part of designing a user file upload, it was a B2B product,limited number of users and in principle trusted users but similar to other comments we did something like:
I have not done the 1 on 1 method before, it sounds interesting and will try it in the future, but I agree with utilizing the grace period to explore, ask and learn as much as possible about the organization and industry.
My additional recommendation would be to try to identify limited-scope projects that contribute to your role and where you can start delivering some value. For me this helps set a clear goal and it is usually easier to identify the specific skills/knowledge/information/contacts I need to complete the task. It also usually feels motivating to check off those early projects.
> My additional recommendation would be to try to identify limited-scope projects that contribute to your role and where you can start delivering some value.
If you are in a leadership role over a team then having a pre-chewed problem ready for new members of your team is a very useful thing you can do. I'm talking well defined problem with a clear path towards success. This helps the new member become use to the team and processes, and gives them an easy win to put some wind in their sails. Also, this can serve as a litmus test to their on the job performance.
In which case that's good feedback to give to management.
Unless they have very good reasons and offer an alternative ("I'm on deadline so can't talk now, but after this sprint I'll have time.") those individuals are actively sabotaging the team and should be dealt with accordingly.
Often management knows all about it and does nothing for one reason or another.
I had two cases of having a toxic coworker and only being able to get them fired after leaving myself. (Step 1 is “oh shit, we lost an important team member”, Step 2 is “aha! we haven’t been able to replace that team member in six months because of the behavior of the toxic employee”). Next thing I see the person is on LinkedIn looking for a new job.
