Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Phage Explorer

phage-explorer.org

31–39 of 39 posts

Re: Show HN: Phage Explorer

#31
post #14

It's rather nice looking, but it would have been so much nicer if you'd done it yourself.

He did do it himself. If you meant "without AI", then it would have never been done in the first place, so you can choose your preference there.

If he paid the same amount of money to an offshore worker to build it, would you say he'd done it himself?

Re: Show HN: Phage Explorer

#32
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He did do it himself. If you meant "without AI", then it would have never been done in the first place, so you can choose your preference there.

If he paid the same amount of money to an offshore worker to build it, would you say he'd done it himself?

Yes? A product designer does make a product, even though they don't write any of the code.

Re: Show HN: Phage Explorer

#33
post #30
post #18

This is so riddled with inaccuracies that I can spot them immediately despite not being a phage biologist. For example, the PhiX image has a DNA with about 20 base pairs - wildly not to scale. M13 is also wildly scaled, and it clearly has a double stranded DNA which is labeled as single stranded. What the hell is this amino acid view? This is not how genes work at all. This is biology 101 and it's completely wrong. W…

Yeah we're all quickly figuring out that LLMs shift the engineering work from computer science to bullshit detection. You basically have to become that guy on the Internet who's always trying to prove you wrong when working with Claude Code. Otherwise you're going to build yourself a false reality and get skewered if you try to share it. I mean I've done it myself, because we're so used to blindly trusting the things…

LLMs may be enabling, but OP explicitly stated "I wanted to dig deeper into the subject, but not by reading a boring textbook", which, of course, would have eliminated the issues in this tool, or at least made it clear to them that they needed to dive deeper before publishing. I feel like there might be some analogy with blaming cars for drunk driving - by definition, not possible without cars, but you can drive responsibly if you choose to.

Re: Show HN: Phage Explorer

#34
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If he paid the same amount of money to an offshore worker to build it, would you say he'd done it himself?

Yes? A product designer does make a product, even though they don't write any of the code.

Perhaps we have a different definition of doing something yourself.

Re: Show HN: Phage Explorer

#35
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes? A product designer does make a product, even though they don't write any of the code.

Perhaps we have a different definition of doing something yourself .

If you write an application, but use libraries, did you do it yourself?

Re: Show HN: Phage Explorer

#36
post #33
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah we're all quickly figuring out that LLMs shift the engineering work from computer science to bullshit detection. You basically have to become that guy on the Internet who's always trying to prove you wrong when working with Claude Code. Otherwise you're going to build yourself a false reality and get skewered if you try to share it. I mean I've done it myself, because we're so used to blindly trusting the things…

LLMs may be enabling, but OP explicitly stated "I wanted to dig deeper into the subject, but not by reading a boring textbook", which, of course, would have eliminated the issues in this tool, or at least made it clear to them that they needed to dive deeper before publishing. I feel like there might be some analogy with blaming cars for drunk driving - by definition, not possible without cars, but you can drive resp…

That's how Plato taught Aristotle. I'd much rather have a dialog than read a textbook. You just have to think critically and fact check. You can't just trust whatever the robot says because it interpolates knowledge.

Re: Show HN: Phage Explorer

#37
post #36
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LLMs may be enabling, but OP explicitly stated "I wanted to dig deeper into the subject, but not by reading a boring textbook", which, of course, would have eliminated the issues in this tool, or at least made it clear to them that they needed to dive deeper before publishing. I feel like there might be some analogy with blaming cars for drunk driving - by definition, not possible without cars, but you can drive resp…

That's how Plato taught Aristotle. I'd much rather have a dialog than read a textbook. You just have to think critically and fact check. You can't just trust whatever the robot says because it interpolates knowledge.

Sure, but there apparently wasn't enough of a dialog either. With a textbook, you're confronted with facts and explanations that you didn't ask about, or even knew to ask about. Don't get me wrong - my original recommendation to take an interactive course is still the best option in my mind, as simplifications made for the benefit of the learner often lead to apparent contradictions that an instructor can clarify. But at some point you do just need the set of raw facts to be able to work with these systems.

Re: Show HN: Phage Explorer

#38
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps we have a different definition of doing something yourself .

If you write an application, but use libraries, did you do it yourself?

This is ridiculous. If you are capable of editing the libraries when necessary, and you don't ask someone else to do it for you, then yes. If you can't do it yourself and need to ask someone to do it for you, then no.

Asking for something out of your head, whether you're requesting a custom sandwich at a drive-thru restaurant or you're the project manager of a software company, is not the same as making it yourself. If it were, then you wouldn't need to drive through the restaurant or be a mid-level managerial parasite to get what you envisioned.

We should still judge people's skills on the merits of what they can create themselves. I've never had much interest in people who just ordered things up from their underlings, and claimed they were the creators. That's stolen merit, if you ask me. Show me someone who can create a piece of code from scratch, and then we can evaluate how well they leveraged an AI or a team of people to do the next piece of code for them. Not every piece of code has to be written from scratch, but it needs to be understood. You seemed to assert that this project would've taken many people many years or it wouldn't otherwise have been written. That's not true. It could be written in a week by a competent human. The fact that it wasn't could be a clue that it doesn't add value to begin with, which in turn implies that its output may be unreliable (even if it were useful).

Re: Show HN: Phage Explorer

#39
post #37
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's how Plato taught Aristotle. I'd much rather have a dialog than read a textbook. You just have to think critically and fact check. You can't just trust whatever the robot says because it interpolates knowledge.

Sure, but there apparently wasn't enough of a dialog either. With a textbook, you're confronted with facts and explanations that you didn't ask about, or even knew to ask about. Don't get me wrong - my original recommendation to take an interactive course is still the best option in my mind, as simplifications made for the benefit of the learner often lead to apparent contradictions that an instructor can clarify. Bu…

Only genuine socialization does that, since you can flip through a textbook. It's the main reason why people go to universities. To hear all the answers they didn't think to ask. LLMs actually do that a little bit. It's both a wonderful and terrifying prospect, since there's so much risk with that kind of feature to introduce bias, but it's great when it works.
Post reply on HN