About me

I’m someone who naturally looks for patterns in everything. I’m very meta-cognitive by nature, which basically means I tend to think deeply, question assumptions, and get pulled into the “why” behind how things work, including the bigger, existential questions. That mindset is exactly why I started out studying Physics at the University of Copenhagen. I completed the first year, which is where you build the full foundation in physics, because I was genuinely fascinated by the scientific method and the idea that the universe can be understood through logic and mathematics.

But during that year, I fell in love with software and computer science.

What really hooked me was that software gives you a very similar kind of satisfaction as physics: you still deal with models, systems, abstraction, and logic, but now you can actually build something and watch it behave. You can go from an idea, to a prototype, to a working tool, and then keep refining it until it feels elegant and reliable. That direct feedback loop is addictive in the best way. I like that you can test your assumptions, measure performance, find edge cases, and continuously improve the solution. It feels like applied logic, and it fits perfectly with how my brain works.

I’m especially drawn to building systems that are robust and thoughtfully designed. I care about structure, clarity, and making things maintainable, not just “getting it to work once.” I like thinking in terms of architecture and flow: how data moves through a system, where things can break, how you make it resilient, and how you design it so it’s easy to extend later. I naturally end up thinking in trade-offs: simplicity versus flexibility, speed versus readability, or convenience versus security. I enjoy those decisions because they force you to be intentional.

I also love the technical process itself. I’m the type who will iterate a lot, because I genuinely enjoy improving things. I like instrumenting code, timing it, comparing approaches, and making sure the final result is not only correct, but solid. If something can be tested, benchmarked, or validated, I’ll probably do it. That is also where my passion for mathematics and logic shows up. I enjoy reasoning about algorithms, complexity, and correctness, and then turning that reasoning into practical code that behaves predictably.

Another big part of what drives me is building software that feels “clean” to use. I’m interested in the full experience, not just the core logic. I like creating tools where the workflow makes sense, where the UI is simple, and where the user doesn’t have to fight the system. I care about small details like reliability, sensible defaults, clear feedback, and making features feel coherent rather than bolted on. In general, I’m motivated by the idea of turning complex problems into something that feels straightforward.

I’m also very motivated by learning and by challenging myself with real projects. I tend to pick problems that force me to grow, because that’s where I get energy. I like combining creativity with logic, and I enjoy the feeling of mastering new tools, frameworks, and patterns. I don’t just want to understand things at a surface level. I like to understand them well enough that I could build them myself, improve them, and explain why they work.

Overall, I’m driven by curiosity and a need to understand how things fit together. I like deep thinking, but I also like building practical solutions. For me, software engineering is the perfect place where those two sides meet, because it lets me explore systems and logic, while still creating something real, useful, and tangible.