We spent decades learning how software works. AI is changing the relationship. I'm interested in what happens when software starts learning how we work instead.
That changes what software is.
It also changes who gets to build it.
This is where I write about that transition.
Every business I have ever worked in reshaped itself around the software it bought. That relationship is about to reverse, and most people have not noticed yet.
Adding a tenth tool to a stack of nine is not a strategy. The question is not which AI you buy, it is what you are willing to hand over.
A prompt is a conversation. Work is context, tools, permissions and a deadline. The gap between those two things is the whole shift.
For thirty years technical meant knowing the syntax. It is starting to mean knowing precisely what you want to happen, which is a very different skill.
An assistant waits to be asked and hands the work back. An operator owns the outcome. Almost everything shipping right now is the first thing wearing the second one's language.
The conversation is still about getting in. I am more interested in what happens now that the distance between having an idea and shipping it has collapsed.
For years, companies changed their workflows to fit the software they bought.
I think that relationship is reversing. The next generation of systems should understand the business first, and shape themselves around the people actually doing the work.
Call it business-shaped software.
I'm not writing about AI from the sidelines. I'm building with it — and these are the parts that don't make it into an essay.
More permissions meant more confident wrong answers, delivered faster. The useful constraint turned out not to be what it could reach, but what it had to confirm before acting.
Half of it collects structure the system can now infer. If nobody has to type it, the screen isn't a feature, it's a tax we kept charging out of habit.
Two lines of ordinary logic did the job with none of the variance. The discipline is noticing when the interesting solution is worse than the boring one.
There's a lot of conversation about getting more women into AI. I'm interested in something slightly different.
What happens when the distance between having a technological idea and actually building it collapses?
AI is changing who gets to create software, companies, systems and infrastructure. Women shouldn't just participate in that transition.
We should build pieces of it.
Astronaut Industries is where these ideas become systems. It builds software around the way businesses actually operate — custom software, automation, workflows, AI and agentic systems in one connected environment. It's the platform I build on, and where these ideas stop being essays.
New essays, field notes, experiments, and ideas about AI, software, and what comes next.
No spam. Unsubscribe whenever you like.