"You wake up to CI/CD results from overnight commits. Your monitoring system has flagged issues and opened tickets. Claude or Cursor helped you ship 300 tested lines before lunch. The critical part: you reviewed everything before it shipped. The AI handled execution, context management, and grunt work. You made the decisions. And crucially: you can't blame your CTO when something breaks. The code is yours. The responsibility is yours. The AI just understands your intent through clear specifications."
"The Problem: Knowledge Work Isn't Like Code Most attempts to build "Cursor for X" fail because they fundamentally misunderstand the problem. In software, /project1/ has zero overlap with /project2/. Each has its own .cursorrules file with preferences. The agent works in one directory at a time. Clear boundaries, no context pollution. This is why Claude Code works beautifully-the problem is bounded, the context is isolated."
Software engineers already operate with automated CI/CD, monitoring, and AI assistance that executes tasks while engineers retain responsibility. Engineers receive overnight CI/CD results, automated tickets from monitoring, and AI tools that generate tested code which engineers review and own. Adoption of these tools occurred bottom-up because they dramatically increased engineer productivity. Knowledge work differs because projects lack the clean, isolated boundaries of code repositories. Knowledge workers hold fragmented, overlapping contexts across products, meetings, and personal notes, which leads to context pollution. Most attempts to create "Cursor for X" fail because they misunderstand these fragmented contexts and try to apply bounded engineering workflows to unbounded knowledge work.
Read at Medium
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]