reflections

Exergonic or Endergonic

by

Do you remember the difference between an exergonic and an endergonic reaction? Honestly, I came across these terms again after many years while reading the book How to Take Smart Notes.

To be concise, I read this passage:

“You may remember from school the difference between an exergonic and an endergonic reaction. In the first case, you constantly need to add energy to keep the process going. In the second case, the reaction, once triggered, continues by itself and even releases energy. The dynamics of work are not so different. Sometimes we feel like our work is draining our energy and we can only move forward if we put more and more energy into it. But sometimes it is the opposite. Once we get into the workflow, it is as if the work itself gains momentum, pulling us along and sometimes even energizing us. This is the kind of dynamic we are looking for.”

So there are activities that drain our energy and others that recharge it.

Although the main purpose of the book is different, this passage made me reflect on the activities we do with AI. Are they exergonic or endergonic?

I’m starting to think that activities done with the help of AI can actually drain our energy. As I read online, I see people trying to produce more and more, sometimes risking burnout. It doesn’t always feel like being in a state of flow, where producing more also recharges us.

Is AI helping us enter a state of flow, or is it replacing it with compulsive productivity? What do you think?

Journaling and time management in the 2026

by

This post is an update of a post that I wrote at the end of 2023. I’d like to share my experience with journaling and time management. I started eight years ago to improve my time management skills and stay focused. I’m not selling anything and don’t have a magic formula, but I hope my experience can help someone. As you may know, my interest lies in computer science; I always have some side projects that help me learn something new, I also enjoy reading (on very different topics), and I’ve just started taking guitar lessons. Last but not least, I’m a husband and a father of three. At the end of the post, you’ll find a bibliography of the books that inspired me (as usual, NO referral links. When I want money from you, I’ll ask directly 😄).

Read more

IT world: a massive flattening of content

by

There’s a growing problem in the IT world: a massive flattening of content.
Especially on LinkedIn, I keep seeing posts like:
“The 10 best books to become an architect”.
“The 10 newsletters you must subscribe to about topic X”.

The truth? Most of these lists don’t add much value.
Ten different books on software architecture are unlikely to say truly different things. And honestly, who has the time to read ten different newsletters every week?
It feels like our industry is turning into the Netflix of content: you have to read book X, subscribe to Alice & Bob’s newsletter… or you’re not “cool.”

I’d love to see more posts that break away from the mainstream. Content that brings fresh ideas, original insights, and new perspectives.
Instead of being the world of innovation, we risk becoming the world of homogenization.

Tech needs a new counter-culture

by
controcultura

Maybe I’m getting older. I’ve started looking back.

While rediscovering – “Terence Trent D’Arby” – now known as “Sananda Maitreya” – I found out he stepped away from the show business to produce music independently, in the name of creative freedom.

It got me thinking: isn’t something similar happening in the software world?
A field that increasingly feels like a show business, where some of the original dreams and values seem to have faded away.
Hacking is often confused with cracking.
Projects are considered “interesting” only if they translate into dollars.
(Did we really just invent AI the day ChatGPT came out?)

I’d love to see new charismatic figures emerge in tech.
A new counterculture and not these pathetic start-up founders of the null.

What I don’t like about the AI hype.

by

Two things I don’t like about the current AI moment:

The word “democratization” in the context of software development.
Why is it considered democratized only now? Was it impossible before to learn computer science through university, courses, books, or videos? Did we not already have resources to learn?
Calling it democratization can be misleading—it may actually be (a fake) simplification. If you don’t understand the fundamentals of computer science, should you really be building software for a bank? (And if you are, please let me know the name of the bank—I’m very interested!)

Schools have long democratized writing: if you know how to write, you can use a pen, or draw letters in the sand with a stick.
But if you build something using AI tools without understanding how it works, and one day the tool breaks, what will you do? Nothing. So where is the democratization in that?

And please don’t tell me that without internet, software engineers wouldn’t be able to work. Sure, we’d be slower without access to documentation, but we can still do our job.

The mantra: “AI doesn’t steal your job, but people using AI will.”
Is this a way to reassure yourself—or just a marketing slogan?