Robert Stowe
banner
robertstowe.com
Robert Stowe
@robertstowe.com
Web development manager. Plain opinions on web software, the engineers who build it, and how AI is changing it all. More at robertstowe.com
Pinned
I put together a starter pack of the people I read on leading engineering teams, design systems, accessibility and the web platform.
AI tools now write the small changes that used to teach engineers the craft. I think the ladder does not rebuild itself, and someone has to decide how juniors learn now.

https://robertstowe.com/how-i-think-engineers-grow-when-ai-writes-the-first-draft/

#AICodingTools #CareerDevelopment
November 4, 2026 at 2:03 PM
Automatic captions now get most words right. I think the test is the review, not who made them, with speakers named, sounds shown, and timing checked.

https://webaim.org/blog/captioned-doesnt-always-mean-accessible

#a11y #SoftwareQuality
WebAIM: Captioned Doesn’t Always Mean Accessible
webaim.org
November 2, 2026 at 3:57 PM
At career day at Drew Charter School, third and sixth graders rebuilt my Flappy Bird clone with AI while they played it. Here is what I told them the job will still need.

https://robertstowe.com/career-day-with-flappy-eagle-at-drew-charter-school/

#ComputerScienceEducation #AICodingTools
October 30, 2026 at 1:25 PM
I think splitting a front end into separately deployed pieces is an organizational change dressed as a technical one. The first question is who owns each piece.

https://robertstowe.com/the-questions-i-would-ask-before-splitting-a-front-end/

#WebDev #SoftwareArchitecture
October 28, 2026 at 2:28 PM
Characterization tests pin what code actually does, not what was intended. I think AI made them cheap to write, so the real cost is now reviewing the diffs.

https://stackoverflow.blog/2026/10/22/the-regression-tests-nobody-writes-capturing-how-software-actually-behaves

#SoftwareTesting
The Regression Tests Nobody Writes: Capturing How Software Actually Behaves - Stack Overflow
Founded in 2008, Stack Overflow’s public platform is used by nearly everyone who codes to learn, share their knowledge, collaborate, and build their careers.
stackoverflow.blog
October 26, 2026 at 2:14 PM
I put together a starter pack of the people I read on leading engineering teams, design systems, accessibility and the web platform.
October 23, 2026 at 7:39 PM
Due diligence under Europe's Cyber Resilience Act ends with a person signing off. I think the hard part is deciding which scanner's answer wins.

https://openssf.org/blog/2026/10/22/who-checked-it-attestations-gemara-and-cra-due-diligence

#SoftwareSupplyChain #Compliance
OpenSSF Gemara: Demystifying Attestations & CRA Due Diligence
Learn how the OpenSSF Gemara project simplifies security attestations and helps organizations meet EU Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) due diligence requirements.
openssf.org
October 23, 2026 at 1:17 PM
I think a one-on-one that turns into a status update has given away the only half hour in the week that belongs to one person. Status has other places to live.

https://robertstowe.com/what-i-think-a-one-on-one-is-for/

#EngineeringManagement #TeamCulture
October 21, 2026 at 1:19 PM
When you start managing managers, I think the biggest change is that you stop seeing the work. Your job becomes the judgment of the people who do.

https://robertstowe.com/what-i-believe-changes-when-you-start-managing-managers/

#EngineeringManagement #EngineeringLeadership
What I believe changes when you start managing managers
What I believe changes when you move from managing engineers to managing managers, and what I think success looks like at that level.
robertstowe.com
October 14, 2026 at 2:51 PM
An essay argues psychological safety drifted into a promise that nobody feels bad. I think the real signal is how early bad news reaches a manager, not team mood.

https://charity.wtf/p/if-your-team-is-happy-are-you-doing

#TeamCulture #EngineeringManagement
If your team is happy, are you doing a good job?
Brilliant jerks, ZIRP-era managers, and how psychological safety lost the plot. Part 3 of my conversation with Dr. Cat Hicks.
charity.wtf
October 12, 2026 at 2:53 PM
A LeadDev piece shows junior engineers shipping fast with AI yet unable to explain the system. I think onboarding should end at the first incident handled alone.

https://leaddev.com/leadership/your-junior-engineers-are-getting-faster-but-are-they-getting-better

#EngineeringOnboarding
Your junior engineers are getting faster but are they getting better?
AI made junior engineers faster but left them without mental models, so one team rebuilt onboarding to restore understanding without losing speed.
leaddev.com
October 9, 2026 at 2:01 PM
I think an estimate is a planning input, not a promise. Most of the trouble with estimates comes from asking them to be the second thing.

https://robertstowe.com/what-i-think-an-estimate-is-for/

#SoftwareDelivery #EngineeringManagement
What I think an estimate is for
An estimate is a planning input, not a promise. What I think estimates are for, why they go wrong when they become commitments, and what I ask for instead.
robertstowe.com
October 7, 2026 at 1:59 PM
Across 600 AI-written test suites, 42.7% had no test separating two readings of the spec. I think that choice belongs to a person, not the model.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.03237v1

#AICodingTools #SoftwareTesting
Pinning Decisions Before Failure: Executable Records of Underspecified Choices in AI-Assisted Code Generation
A natural-language requirement leaves questions open, and a model asked to implement it settles them silently: across 600 generated test suites from three models, 42.7% contain no test that distinguishes the competing readings. An acceptance example written before implementing is the usual remedy, but an example both readings satisfy resolves nothing. We insert two steps into that practice: enumerate the requirement's underspecified points by name, then for each construct two throwaway implementations differing only in that point and keep a candidate input only if executing both shows they disagree. The result is recorded as a decision pin: the named point, the confirmed input, and the value the person chose between the two exhibited results. The same record then constrains generation and decides compliance by execution. On a benchmark of 40 tasks with paired reference implementations and two models, a separating input is obtained for 92.5% of decision points and a pin identifying the intended decision for 85-90%. As checks on 703 independently generated implementations, pins agree with the benchmark's classification on 96-97%, with disagreements on three tasks, one where both classifiers erred. As generation constraints, pins are honoured at the pinned input in all 210 generations and are never worse than a prose rule on held-out inputs in 38 cells, though no better than prose stating the same scope. Every compliance failure under a prose rule came from the model deciding the rule's scope itself; one such case silently overturned another recorded decision, was attributed to a single rule by leave-one-out on both models, and was missed by text-level reconciliation but caught by re-running the recorded input. The setting yields too few such conflicts to evaluate a regression step, and we say why.
arxiv.org
October 5, 2026 at 1:58 PM
A review of 284 studies found architecture decay is easy to detect and poorly linked to fixes. I think teams need owners for findings, not more metrics.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.01611v1

#SoftwareArchitecture #LegacyModernization
Architectural Degradation: How to Measure and to Remediate
Context. Architectural degradation undermines software maintainability, evolvability, and quality. However, existing research remains fragmented across measurement approaches, metrics, tools, and remediation strategies, limiting our understanding of how these elements relate across the degradation lifecycle. Aim. We consolidate the state of the art on architectural degradation by examining how researchers measure it, which metrics and tools support its assessment, and how existing approaches address remediation. Method. We conducted a Multivocal Literature Review of 284 peer-reviewed and grey-literature studies. We supported screening, data extraction, and classification with a locally executed LLM-assisted pipeline combining Retrieval-Augmented Generation, multi-model validation, and human adjudication. We then analyzed the resulting taxonomies and their cross-dimensional relationships. Results and Conclusions. We identified 277 measurement approaches, 357 metrics, 238 tools, and 395 remediation approaches. Research strongly concentrates on static and structural analysis, structural metrics, and detection-oriented tools. In contrast, remediation spans heterogeneous code-level, architectural, and organizational interventions and shows substantially less consolidation. Overall, the field has developed a mature diagnostic apparatus but has made less progress in connecting degradation detection with effective remediation. Our results provide a structured view of the available techniques and identify the diagnosis-remediation gap as a key direction for future research.
arxiv.org
October 5, 2026 at 12:09 AM
Most technical standards are written once, read twice, and ignored. I think the ones teams follow are short, give reasons, are enforced by tooling, and have an owner.

https://robertstowe.com/writing-technical-standards-people-follow/

#TechnicalStandards #EngineeringLeadership
Writing technical standards people follow
Most technical standards are written once, read twice, and ignored. What separates the ones teams follow: short, reasoned, enforced by tooling, and owned.
robertstowe.com
October 4, 2026 at 3:08 AM