<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
  <channel>
    <title>AI on Gniewomir Świechowski</title>
    <link>https://gniewomir.com/categories/ai/</link>
    <description>Recent content in AI on Gniewomir Świechowski</description>
    
    <generator>Hugo -- 0.147.8</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://gniewomir.com/categories/ai/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>You can un-slop code but not documentation</title>
      <link>https://gniewomir.com/posts/you-can-unslop-code-but-not-documentation/</link>
      <pubDate>Sat, 09 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://gniewomir.com/posts/you-can-unslop-code-but-not-documentation/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;There is a huge problem I have not seen discussed in the context of AI. Documentation—just like code—can rot when subjected to unrestricted AI use, and this is not something that can be easily, if at all, fixed.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Missing, misleading or outdated documentation forces rushed explorations focused on how, not why—which tightens competition for resources between research, design, and implementation. Good documentation warns about dead ends and explains constraints, allowing teams to reach better decisions faster. Yet, having a good knowledge base was hard before AI, and I&amp;rsquo;m convinced that it will get even harder with it.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>AI can screw passive investors</title>
      <link>https://gniewomir.com/posts/ai-can-screw-passive-investors/</link>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://gniewomir.com/posts/ai-can-screw-passive-investors/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;I&amp;rsquo;m in a bind. On the one hand, I&amp;rsquo;m a big proponent of passive, boring investing—on the other, this approach taken to the logical conclusion of sitting on my hands steers me toward extreme over-exposure to AI.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The main issue is that if you try to have low-maintenance exposure to the global stock market, ~60%+ of your ETF(s) exposure will be toward the USA. Then, ~30%+ of it will be the Magnificent Seven (Nvidia, Alphabet, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Meta, and Tesla). Which is a pretty sizable bet, all of which can be considered an AI play.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
