Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Why write code if the LLM can just do the thing? (web app experiment)

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 332 posts

Re: Show HN: Why write code if the LLM can just do the thing? (web app experiment)

#231

Post by simianwords »

chii wrote: post #229
simianwords wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this is a weak argument.. i use normal taxis and ask the driver to take me to a place in natural language - a process which is certainly non deterministic.

and the taxi driver has an intelligence that enables them to interpret your destination, even if ambiguous. And even then, mistakes happen (all the time with taxis going to a different place than the passenger intended because the names may have been similar).

Yes so a bit of non determinism doesn’t hurt anyone. Current LLMs are pretty accurate when it comes to these sort of things.

Re: Show HN: Why write code if the LLM can just do the thing? (web app experiment)

#232

Post by jokethrowaway »

ozim wrote: post #230

Calculation is $0.05/request is valid only as far as AI companies continue to burn money as they are in grab the market phase. Once the dust settles prices will go up. Even if running models will be cheaper they will need to earn back all the burned cash. I’d much rather vibe code app get the code to run on some server.

not necessarily, hardware and software gains will make tokens cheaper, so we'll see where we are once the vc money runs out (or the entire US economy, there's a chance AI will pop the tech bubble of the last 20 years: I think tech company evaluation are insanely inflated compared to the value they provide)

I can get gpt 3 level of quality with qwen 8B, even qwen 4B in some cases

Re: Show HN: Why write code if the LLM can just do the thing? (web app experiment)

#233

Post by bloomca »

AmbroseBierce wrote: post #82
d-lisp wrote: post #54

Why would you need webapps when you could just talk out loud to your computer ? Why would I need programs with colors, buttons, actual UI ? I am trying to imagine a future where file navigators don't even exist : "I want to see the photos I took while I was in vacations last year. Yes, can you remove that cloud ? Perfect, now send it to XXXX's computer and say something nice." "Can you set some timers for my sport se…

>Can you set some timers for my sport session, can you plan a pure body weight session ? Yes, that's perfect. Wait, actually, remove the jumping jacks." Better yet, why exercise -which is so repetitive- if we can create a machine that just does it for you, including the dopamine triggering, why play an arcade video game where we can create a machine that fires the neuron needed to produce the exact same level of a ex…

> Bleak, we are oversimplifying existence itself and it doesn't lead to a nice place.

We are already on this path for many-many years, certainly decades if not centuries, although availability was definitely spotty in the past.

It is also kind of impossible to hop off this train, while it is individually possible to reject any of these conveniences, in general they just become a part of life. Which is not necessarily a bad thing, but just different.

Re: Show HN: Why write code if the LLM can just do the thing? (web app experiment)

#234

Post by [deleted] »

jstummbillig wrote: post #48
sunaurus wrote: post #20

The question posed sounds like "why should we have deterministic behavior if we can have non-deterministic behavior instead?" Am I wrong to think that the answer is obvious? I mean, who wants web apps to behave differently every time you interact with them?

Because nobody actually wants a "web app". People want food, love, sex or: solutions. You or your coworker are not a web app. You can do some of the things that web apps can, and many things that a web app can't, but neither is because of the modality. Coded determinism is hard for many problems and I find it entirely plausible that it could turn out to be the wrong approach in software, that is designed to solve som…

[deleted]

Re: Show HN: Why write code if the LLM can just do the thing? (web app experiment)

#235

Post by tmsbrg »

So the AI basically hallucinates a webapp?

I guess any user can just run something /api/getdatabase/dumppasswords and it will give any user the passwords?

or /webapp?html=alert() and run arbitrary JS?

I'm surprised nobody mentioned that security is a big reason not to do anything like this.

Re: Show HN: Why write code if the LLM can just do the thing? (web app experiment)

#236

Post by zelphirkalt »

runarberg wrote: post #199
ethmarks wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree wholeheartedly. It irks me when people critique automation because it uses large amounts of resources. Running a machine or a computer almost always uses far less resources than a human would to do the same task, so long as you consider the entire resource consumptions. Growing the food that a human eats, running the air conditioning for their home, powering their lights, fueling their car, charging their pho…

I suspect you may be either underestimating how efficient our brains are at computing or severely underestimating how much energy these AI models take to train and run. Even including our system of comfort like refrigerated blueberries in January and AC cooling a 40° C heat down to 25° C (but excluding car commutes, because please work from home or take public transit) the human is still far far more energy efficient…

Hm, that gives me an idea: The next human vs engine matches in chess, go, and so on, should be set at a specific level of energy consumption of the engines, that's close or approximately that of an extremely good human player, like a world champion or at least grand master. Let's see how engines keep up then!

Re: Show HN: Why write code if the LLM can just do the thing? (web app experiment)

#238

Post by timeon »

d-lisp wrote: post #54

Why would you need webapps when you could just talk out loud to your computer ? Why would I need programs with colors, buttons, actual UI ? I am trying to imagine a future where file navigators don't even exist : "I want to see the photos I took while I was in vacations last year. Yes, can you remove that cloud ? Perfect, now send it to XXXX's computer and say something nice." "Can you set some timers for my sport se…

> “Hell of a world we live in, huh?” The proprietor was a thin black man with bad teeth and an obvious wig. I nodded, fishing in my jeans for change, anxious to find a park bench where I could submerge myself in hard evidence of the human near-dystopia we live in. “But it could be worse, huh?”

> “That’s right,” I said, “or even worse, it could be perfect.”

-- William Gibson: The Gernsback Continuum

Re: Show HN: Why write code if the LLM can just do the thing? (web app experiment)

#239

Post by ozim »

lazide wrote: post #68
113 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because nobody actually wants a "web app". People want food, love, sex or: solutions. Okay but when I start my car I want to drive it, not fuck it.

Even if it purred real nice when it started up? (I’m sorry)

Looks like we have a Civic owner xD

Re: Show HN: Why write code if the LLM can just do the thing? (web app experiment)

#240

Post by lambdaone »

113 wrote: post #57
jstummbillig wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because nobody actually wants a "web app". People want food, love, sex or: solutions. You or your coworker are not a web app. You can do some of the things that web apps can, and many things that a web app can't, but neither is because of the modality. Coded determinism is hard for many problems and I find it entirely plausible that it could turn out to be the wrong approach in software, that is designed to solve som…

> Because nobody actually wants a "web app". People want food, love, sex or: solutions. Okay but when I start my car I want to drive it, not fuck it.

Sadly, this is not true of a (admittedly very small) number of individuals.
Post reply on HN