Negativity and opportunities: again

Most people have a negative attitude.

We see problems and risks, rather than opportunities.

And negativity increases with age.

As we get older, our appetite for risk decreases. We become more conservative. We are afraid of change. We see fewer opportunities, as we have more to lose. Loss aversion bias appears. Potential losses seem more important than gains.

And we tend to see only problems, only the negative side of things. “The world is doomed, nothing works, education collapses, things were better in the past, today’s immoral youth, technology is dangerous, AI will destroy humanity.”

Of course, looking for problems is also a pragmatic, engineering mindset. You need to see problems - to start looking for solutions. In fact, every opportunity starts with a problem. Solutions rarely appear before problems (although it happens, and occasionally even disruptive).

I pushed myself for so long to think in terms of opportunities rather than risks, that it became a reflex.

I am conservative by nature, and I had to train my sense of opportunity.

Now I have an allergic reaction when I see fear of technology, fear of new, risk reports that block opportunities.

AI replaces software programmers and composers, yet?

After three years of AI revolution, I still believe that major technological revolutions create jobs and businesses. They don’t create unemployment. The invention of the plow didn’t put gatherers out of work. The printing press sparked a phenomenal boom in the book industry and jobs: printing houses, publishers, libraries, writers, translators.

AI won’t lead to the disappearance of software and technology companies either. It will multiply them. 

(Rant triggered by very cool discussions with Vlad Coroama, Mihai Amariutei, Alexander Kruel).

As for how much software programming will actually change, I have reservations. 

I first said it 25 years ago: Software developers are cheap, and replaceable. But software is much more than that. We need architects and engineers; not coders. We need people who understand mathematics, algorithms, data, patterns, design, methodology. "Writing code" is a low-level job, and requires low-level qualifications.

This is even more true today - when AI replaces more and more low-level jobs.

But:

DOES AI REPLACE REAL DEVELOPERS?

=> NO.

We write code every day, at Hermix. With AI. 

From our experience, AI isn’t miraculous, yet. Surely it helps. But it doesn’t replace us - it just helps us. It is a fast, limited assistant.

SO WHAT ABOUT ALL THE STORIES ABOUT VIBE CODING?

Every day, we read about a new AI agent writing an entire application from scratch. 

An AI agent wrote a C compiler. Another migrated an Nintendo game to run in the browser. A non-tech guy built an entire web app in 10 minutes. An AI invented a new game (ask for links).

Are these true?

Well, some are true, but they are anecdotic, exaggerated, not replicable.

If you examine them closely, none is a genuine example of truly innovative real-world application, built from scratch without human help.

It is trivial to write a C compiler in 2026. We already have thousands of open-source C compilers. 

It is trivial to rewrite an application from one language to another.

AI-generated code has security / architecture /design problems, needs huge corrections and rewrites to make it viable.

I keep an open mind, I read and follow developments, I test new stuff (never enough). But I haven’t seen a reliable case of a real, original application entirely generated by AI - yet.

That being said:

I STRONGLY BELIEVE IN AI and the AI REVOLUTION.

It is already transformative, it revolutionizes the society and economy.

As of now, AI doesn't operate independently. Doesn't replace teams of developers, nor music composers, painters, translators.

It only helps them.

AI remains an assistant, for those programmers / architects / composers / managers who are smart enough to control an army of AI agents. Essentially the same visionaries who already knew how to coordinate teams of human agents, to achieve original, impressive results.

The reality is that we now have (many) agents that can quickly solve deterministic computational problems. But we’re still talking about armies of junior agents — unoriginal, not very smart, and very fast. 

American checks and balances: the next world order

 The American democracy is a special construction. It is based on a complex set of checks and balances, built into the Constitution from the very beginning, with the precise purpose of preventing a single man or an interest group from seizing power.

This worked very well until now.

During Trump’s first term, it worked surprisingly well. American judges were still independent. Civil servants, police officers, and FBI agents were still independent. Prosecutors opened investigations against their own superiors.

Parliament blocked military or budgetary decisions of the presidency. The army said that the laws do not allow the execution of just any order given by the president.

Now it no longer works. I am shocked by this simple sentence: the American system of checks and balances, which was supposed to protect American democracy, collapsed after Trump’s second election.

The American democratic system has collapsed entirely. There are no more checks and balances.

It is somewhat similar to the rise of Octavian Augustus.

Caesar still pretended to listen to the Senate, but Octavian put an end to those foolish ideas, declared himself a God, and stopped the nonsense about Democracy, the Republic, and the Senate.

This is where we are now.

Trump has put an end to the nonsense about Democracy, the Republic, and the Senate.

I must underline that Trump will not be the first imperator of America. He is too old, too senile. He does not see far enough ahead. He is happy just making a bit more money with trumpcoin or penguicoin.

Not even Trump’s children will be the first American dictators. They are incompetent.

The next imperator of America will be a grandson of Vance, Thiel, or Musk. Someone who will get hold of an artillery division at the right moment, like Napoleon or Octavian, and will declare “the Consulate.” And then will occupy the Senate entirely, to the cheers of the masses.

The American dictatorship will most likely bring global stability in the medium term. The supremacy of America at the global level, as a world empire.

Much like the supremacy of the Roman Empire.

We are heading toward a Pax Americana lasting several hundred years.

I believe this will be a good thing for our children and grandchildren.

Their lives will be characterized by peace, under the umbrella of an American dictatorship and supremacy over the entire world.

The Metaverse is officially dead

Mark Z. officially confirmed the death of the Metaverse. Fired the full team. Closed the project. A failure of 70 bil. USD. 

We all knew that it wouldn't work. 

I said it wouldn't work, from before testing the VR headset.

I confirmed that it doesn't work after buying and testing the VR kit. 

E.g https://blog.stefanmorcov.com/2023/03/the-metaverse-is-dead.html

The technology is not there yet. VR quality and feeling is low, like a smartphone from 2002. Low resolution and image quality. No solution for a keyboard or mouse. No integration with desktop or mobile. 

No business use case or benefit.

No serious advantage over using a phone or computer, and paying in Eur/ USD.

Which led to a shocking lack of content: no business applications, no 3D movies (!!), few and poor 3D games.

A friend gave me the best illustration of the uselessness of the technology. He was using the VR headset for (1) playing ping-pong with his brother - who lives next door, and (2) watching movies with his girlfriend - in the same room.

I strongly believe in the future of VR. But we need another Steve Jobs to revolutionize the technology and concept.

About Work, Personal Life, and Values

Holidays are coming. People debate how many days off we need, or deserve.

At the heart of this discussion there are two distinct layers.

1. A Set of Practical Problems. 

Very concrete, pragmatic questions:

Why do public-sector employees need more vacation days than those in the private sector?

Why do they receive special pensions?

Who actually works on January 5th?

Why is January 6th a public holiday?

Is “making up” lost workdays a real practice, or just a global illusion?

Do we need 35 or 56 holidays per year? 30 or 50 work hours per week?

These are not minor details. They affect productivity, fairness, and how we organize our economic life.

2. A Question of Principle — and Culture

Beyond the practicalities, there’s a deeper issue at stake: a cultural one.

What values do we truly believe in and promote as a society?

Do we value work and results?

Or do we prioritize free time, rest, and relaxation?

It’s an interesting topic—and a nuanced one.

There’s a popular urban myth that corporatists (and public servants) have job security, stable income, unions, and a comfortable 9-to-5 schedule. But that’s not always how it works.

Sometimes it means working so hard your head spins—and carrying unused vacation days for five years straight. At one point, I personally had accumulated around a hundred unused vacation days. I’ve even forgotten the exact number (today, that wouldn’t be legal anymore).

I was working roughly 14 hours a day, weekends included. Those hours didn’t count, of course—we weren’t allowed to record them officially. And yet, it was fine.

I fit that lifestyle well. So did most in my generation, and many of those who build careers in corporations, in the Big Four, in McKinsey, KPMG, GE, and similar.

Also, Entrepreneurship Isn’t Always Burnout

Entrepreneurship doesn’t always mean working 20 hours a day without vacations.

Some people choose entrepreneurship—or, more often, freelancing—precisely because they want 60 days of vacation per year. Of course, not the same people who thrive on nonstop work.

Surely, the big advantage of entrepreneurship remains true: on weekends, you can start your workday whenever you want.

Back to the Core Question

What are the values of our society?

Do we prioritize free time and personal life?

Or work and results?

The answer isn’t simple—and perhaps it shouldn’t be. But it’s a conversation worth having.