Everything that waits on Dinis

The release candidate was written from the register, and the register was written from the articles; where the articles stop, the chapters stop and say so. This page collects every For Dinis note in the 41 chapters, and the ideas the map has not placed.

The notes in the chapters (47)

• Gen ZX: who this book is for, and what it is for: the measure. How does a reader tell us about their company, and is the list public? The article keeps it as your question, and the last chapter needs the answer before it can do more than ask.
• Gen ZX: who this book is for, and what it is for: is this the second edition of *Generation Z Developers*, or a new book that grew out of it? Decision 014 leaves it open. This chapter says "edition" throughout, and the publisher's brief waits on the same answer.
• You are lucky to be here: who was the podcast? If you can find it, the book should credit her here; the article left her unnamed.
• You are lucky to be here: does the dot-com crash belong here, on the first pages, or later in the book? The article left it as your question. It is here for now because part of the reader's fear is a fear of exactly this crash.
• Everything is connected: graphs: the 2018 outline's first bullet says "See my presentation on Graphs". Which presentation did you mean? If it still exists, the chapter should name it and take from it.
• Everything is connected: graphs: graphs before Wardley maps, or the other way round? The chapter map puts this one first because a map is a graph with positions; the article leaves the order as your question.
• Where do you land?: three examples of jobs that never scaled, and now can. The article asks for them and the chapter needs them here; without them this section is a claim without a case.
• Connect the dots backwards: your own dots, connected backwards. The article asks which three make the best story; SG/Send above, and The Cyber Boardroom and MyFeeds below, are three candidates. Are they the ones, or is the story elsewhere?
• Connect the dots backwards: what does multidisciplinary look like for an explorer, a villager and a town planner? The article asks it as an interview question; one example each would anchor this chapter for the three readers.
• What generative AI is: the book can only reproduce Lee Brimelow's image with his permission. The alternative the article names is to extend *The Starry Night* ourselves, with a named tool, and show that. Which one?
• Lenses, roles and loops: the first time you saw a model ask for a tool instead of answering. The article's interview script asks for it, and it would open this section better than the dates do.
• Everyone who can brief an agent is a developer: the article plans the question of what the briefing-only developer cannot do as interview question 6, and the material gives only the non-functional requirements list. Your own answer, with one example of a brief that was not enough, belongs here.
• Explorer coding, not vibe coding, and the handover: in a company of one, is the villager someone you hire, a village company you pay by consumption, or you on alternate days? Your answer belongs at the end of this chapter.
• Explorer coding, not vibe coding, and the handover: the chapter says you read HBR's public summary and Olivier Laplace's post, not the full article. If that has changed since 17 October, the sentence should change with it.
• Hired for the workflow: the OWASP interview: which project, roughly which year, and whether the company can be named. The chapter stands without it, but the story is better with the detail.
• Act as the job you want: the person at the startup summit: may she be named, and what happened next? The article says you have not asked her yet.
• Act as the job you want: the memo on the job hunt in 2026: interviews, take-home tests with and without AI, a junior role day to day, freelancing. *Start from the storyline* and the survey both list it as the first gap; this section is the placeholder for it.
• Publish, publish, publish: your own newsroom: the 2018 outline promised a graph of how much great minds and artists publish, as evidence that frequency is a sign of talent. Did you have a source in mind, or should that claim be cut?
• Your first workspace: the beginner's checklist of accounts and what they cost (the Workspace seat, the Claude plan, the agent's own mailbox) is still a gap in the material; the only figure the articles give is "a few pounds a month" for a Workspace mailbox. The hands-on chapter *Form your company* will need the same list.
• How to work with agents: when the article was written the Librarian did not run yet; the sources existed and the brief was written. Does it run now, and what did the first weeks of briefs change about how you start the day?
• Direction is the scarce skill: the Google executive's test appears in the 2018 outline and again in *How cheap is it to undo*, both times from memory; if the source can be found the book should name it, and if not, say so once.
• Facts, evidence and the record: the cost figure is from your memory; the article asks the book to give one example of such a system with a real number, which only you can supply.
• Facts, evidence and the record: two of the article's questions for you are left open here: how you prepare for a meeting today, step by step; and whether the book may mention your daughters, as the article does when it makes the Snapchat point. This draft keeps them out until you decide.
• Be a founder: the expert founders: the article discloses that two of the three expert founders are people you help, and that sgit.ai and RiskMandate are yours. Does the book carry that disclosure in the chapter text, as here, or only in the provenance the build renders?
• Ship it, and see if they miss it: the five-day, ten-customer, 90-minute story is told here with the dates the research agents confirmed, and the thirty-customer figure is named as unverified. Do you want the SG/Send story in this chapter at this length, or kept short here and told in full in *Your first price and your first ten customers*?
• Price it, then give it away: the reading meter's review is on 6 December 2026, and the early access programme's stop rule says the founders set the number before the first message goes out. For the next candidate: what the review found, and what number you set.
• Sell: the marketplace article names Mondweep Chakravorty as the first consultant beside you, and says neither of you is taking bookings. Does the book name him, as here, and does this chapter wait for the first paid engagement before it says what the prices turned out to be?
• Fund it, or do not: the controllable-founder article proposes three ways to test the hypothesis: follow the coachability ratings for ten years, compare the mission rather than the multiple, and count the founders who refused term sheets. Does the book carry the test, so a reader with data can run it, or only the hypothesis and its counter-evidence?
• The company itself: the UK, Portugal, Lithuania, the European Union: the UK memo (creating a limited company, from your experience), the Lithuania memo and the Portugal memo are the three the journalist needs before this chapter can say the steps. Your own open question stands: Lithuania and the EU, written now from what you know, or after you have done it?
• The company itself: the UK, Portugal, Lithuania, the European Union: the EU memo (the programmes and what exists for a founder), and whether this chapter or *The credits and programmes, 2026* carries the cloud providers and startup programmes, so the two do not repeat each other.
• Serverless, for real: what a founder on their first product should expect to pay in a month, for one site, one vault and a model on a free tier with their own key; the register says costs for a newcomer is still a gap, and only you have the receipts.
• Privacy by design: SG/Send, sgit, and the value of constraints: the register flags a tension: the frame article presents SG/Send and sgit by their privacy property, and *The value of constraints* says nobody buys them for it. Which does the book lead with when it names them, the workflow or the property?
• Controlling your agent: RiskMandate: the 2018 outline on third-party modules asked for the story behind the developers who thought of mining coins from users with the sleep function, and a simulated npm hack story. Only you know whether either belongs here.
• Open source: your own first pull request to someone else's project, and what it led to; the 2018 chapter says the usual outcome is nothing, and a reader will want the counter-example from your life.
• Shipped means the user has it: the story of the site that went down for hours over one character, a pipe, in an nginx config; the 2018 TDD outline promises it and this is where it belongs.
• Graphs, memory and your future self: the 2018 *Future Self* outline promised a Twitter case study from the writing of that book, with two screenshots and no text. What did they show? The story would make this section concrete.
• Civic responsibility: the register notes that a Portuguese edition, or both languages, is your open question, and this chapter is the one it bears on most. Which is it, and does the Hacking Portugal material stay here or move to the new edition of that book?
• An agentic workflow from zero: the walkthrough is written for someone with customers, which fits the founder. For the reader going into a job, should the exercises run on their own contacts instead?
• A tiny agent loop: the article asks for "a page of code or a no-code version". This is the no-code version. The page of code needs your choice of language and tool, and whether it lives on the page or on the site, where it can be kept current.
• Images, infographics and storyboards, drawn by code: the Guide's pronouns are they/them in the cast file until you decide how the author appears. Is the Guide drawn as you?
• Meeting briefs and follow-ups: the article asks you for how you prepare for a meeting today, step by step. This chapter needs it: the three briefs above are the shape, and your steps are the chapter.
• Meeting briefs and follow-ups: "hundreds of thousands or millions of pounds" is from your memory of what such systems cost. The article says the book should give an example with a number.
• Form your company: the memo on creating a limited company in the UK, step by step, as you have done it: the registration, the bank account, the first filings, and what you would do differently now. *Gen ZX Developers* names it as the first gap article; this chapter is its placeholder.
• Form your company: the memos on Lithuania, Portugal and the European Union, and the question you kept apart in the same article: written now, from what you know, or after you have done it? The Portuguese chapter can start from pt.newsroom.sgit.ai; the Lithuanian one has two lines.
• The credits and programmes, 2026: which of the programmes in the table RiskMandate applied to from agent@riskmandate.ai, and what came back, so that the chapter can carry one worked application beside the method.
• How this book was made, and what you made: still open on the record: whether this is the second edition of *Generation Z Developers* or a new book that grew out of it (Leanpub, the ISBN, Amazon and this site's address hang on it); and whether "V2.0" in your memo meant site v0.2.0, as the journalist read it.
• How this book was made, and what you made: how a reader tells us about their company, beyond the address, and whether the list of companies is public, is your open question from *Gen ZX Developers*. The answer belongs here and in the first chapter.

Ideas with no chapter (0)

• none

The questions the articles keep apart

Each co-written article ends with questions for Dinis; the graph's hub lists them, and the chapters that depend on an answer carry a note above.