Sometimes you have to go slow (talk) in order to go fast (build the right thing).

"Slow is smooth, and smooth is fast." If you move fast _and_ you break things you just end up with a lot of broken things. I never did understand this philosophy.

One of the most expensive learnings was: If you want to do it fast, do it slow.

Time and time again proven true.

Or: how the industry ends up with about half the things they build going completely unused.

> When speed is the priority, there’s no incentive to improve or invest in the shared system (e.g. a design system or codebase) under a tight deadline.

These guardrails are precisely what should be laid down in advance to enable workers to run safely with AI. Write all the rules in your AGENTS file, and point your AI reviewer at it. Encode whatever you can describe algorithmically in commit hooks. This will get you 90% of the way there, and peer review will take care of the rest.

I am hopeful that AI will empower smaller companies, where there is less deadweight, and consensus can be formed more quickly. Discussing what to build is not wasted time; it's one of the few things that favors humans.

This isn’t related at all but it’s sure interesting how our brains evolved. When we are cognitively taxed, our ability to communicate breaks down. When we are physically taxed and doing something we are built to do (like running), conversations flow in the strangest ways. Heck, I’ve had long in depth conversations about Infinite Jest with total strangers on trail runs. It kind of makes you wonder about a whole lot of stuff we have filled our worlds with.

I am not sure for people who wrote this, did they realize most of the time these conversations are just for politics reasons? In a non cooperative environment, projects moving fast does not mean individual is moving fast or vice versa. But if you are in a cooperative environment pretty much people just act what he suggested naturally.