Spent the afternoon reviewing the sensor integration architecture with Tanaka. It's clean. Genuinely clean. The kind of design where you can see the person thought about what happens two years from now, not just what ships on Friday.

I keep thinking about this. We're a small team and we move fast, and that's good, but speed isn't the thing that matters. What matters is whether the thing you built is still standing when someone else has to work on it. Whether the person who inherits your code can understand what you were trying to do and why.

I want us to be the kind of team that leaves things better than we found them. Not because anyone's watching, but because that's what good engineering is. You build it right because it deserves to be built right.

Quick thought on code reviews. I've been at places where review is a gate — someone stamps your diff and you move on. That's not review, that's bureaucracy wearing engineering's clothes.

Good review is a conversation. You're not looking for mistakes, you're trying to understand what the other person saw that you didn't. Every review is a chance to learn something. If you finish a review and you haven't learned anything, either the code was trivial or you weren't paying attention.

Let's keep doing it the way we do it. Talk about the code. Ask questions. Push back when something feels wrong, even if you can't articulate why yet. Especially then.

Started last week. Still getting oriented but I like what I see. Smart people, interesting problem, and nobody's pretending the hard parts are easy. That's rare. Usually by day three someone's told you the architecture is "simple" and you've already found three things that prove it isn't.

Looking forward to digging in.