Only Steve Jobs may innovate

The event itself under-delivers in instructive ways: content pitched at absolute beginners ▸ 7:55, a free RSVP that overfilled the room, and an overflow area improvised around a TV streaming the next room over with a thirty-second delay, laughter arriving twice ▸ 9:48. One product note survives: Windsurf charges per message, not per token, which quietly trains users to cram everything into one giant prompt to save credits ▸ 6:05, the opposite of the one-objective-at-a-time practice that actually works ▸ 6:26. Pricing is a pedagogy; this one teaches the wrong lesson.

The hallway is where the value was. A Platzi engineer describes their pipeline: AI writes the code, but before production, humans review every line, each person owning a section, so when something breaks there’s a name attached ▸ 13:47, because “echarle la culpa a la IA es como que difícil” ▸ 14:21. Accountability, not capability, is the human’s remaining production role, and it’s load-bearing.

“solo los genios innovan” es la frase con la que uno se excluye de innovar →

Then the exchange that names the entry: he floats his conviction that the best interface is no interface, voice, intent, zero manuals ▸ 14:57, and the engineer goes defensive, landing on: only someone like Steve Jobs can predict the future, put a screen on it and the world follows ▸ 15:56. He wanted a conversation and got a wall ▸ 16:23. The diary should name the fallacy plainly: only geniuses innovate is a sentence whose only function is to excuse the speaker from trying, and it was said, without irony, at an event about tools that let anyone build software. The same man reads arXiv as his morning newspaper ▸ 16:49, which at least is a consistent way to wait for the future instead of guessing at it…