Live data from Hacker News

Writing Code Was Never the Bottleneck

ordep.dev

91–100 of 400 posts

Re: Writing Code Was Never the Bottleneck

#91
For me, writing CSS and coming up with professional looking designs were huge bottlenecks. Now I delegate those tasks to LLMs.

I recently started working on a client's project where we were planning on hiring a designer to build the front-end UI. Turns out, Gemini can generate really good UIs. Now we're saving a lot of time because I don't have to wait on the designer to provide designs before I can start building. The cost savings are most welcome as well.

Coding is definitely a bottleneck because my client still needs my help to write code. In the future, non-programmers should be able to build products on their own.

Re: Writing Code Was Never the Bottleneck

#92
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I suspect that the majority of the people who claim that these tools are making them more productive are simply skipping these tasks altogether I think that's probably true, but I think there are multiple layers here. There's what's commonly called vibe coding, where you don't even look at the code. Then there's what I'd call augmented coding, where you generate a good chunk of the code, but still refactor and gene…

If you are writing code to solve a one off task the first category is ok. What boggles my mind is people are writing code that’s the foundation of products like that. Maybe it’s imposter syndrome though to think it wasn’t already being done before the rise of LLMs

> Maybe it’s imposter syndrome though to think it wasn’t already being done before the rise of LLMs

It may well have been happening before the rise of LLMs, but the volume was a lot more manageable

Now it's an unrestricted firehose of crap that there just not enough good devs to wrangle

Re: Writing Code Was Never the Bottleneck

#93
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I suspect that the majority of the people who claim that these tools are making them more productive are simply skipping these tasks altogether I think that's probably true, but I think there are multiple layers here. There's what's commonly called vibe coding, where you don't even look at the code. Then there's what I'd call augmented coding, where you generate a good chunk of the code, but still refactor and gene…

If you are writing code to solve a one off task the first category is ok. What boggles my mind is people are writing code that’s the foundation of products like that. Maybe it’s imposter syndrome though to think it wasn’t already being done before the rise of LLMs

In my experience, it was. And if we're getting real for a moment, the vast majority of programmers gets paid by a company that is, first and foremost, interested in making more money. IMHO all technical decisions are business decisions in disguise.

Can the business afford to ship something that fails for 5% of their users? Can they afford to find out before they ship it or only after? What risks do they want to take? All business decisions. In my CTO jobs and fractional CTO work, I always focused on exposing these to the CEO. Never a "no", always a "here's what I think our options and their risks and consequences are".

If sound business decisions lead to vibe coding, then there's nothing wrong with it. It's not wrong to loose a bet where you understood the odds.

And don't worry about businesses that make uniformed bets. They can get lucky, but by and large, they will not survive against those making better informed bets. Law of averages. Just takes a while.

Re: Writing Code Was Never the Bottleneck

#94
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I suspect that the majority of the people who claim that these tools are making them more productive are simply skipping these tasks altogether I think that's probably true, but I think there are multiple layers here. There's what's commonly called vibe coding, where you don't even look at the code. Then there's what I'd call augmented coding, where you generate a good chunk of the code, but still refactor and gene…

If you are writing code to solve a one off task the first category is ok. What boggles my mind is people are writing code that’s the foundation of products like that. Maybe it’s imposter syndrome though to think it wasn’t already being done before the rise of LLMs

Developers have always loved the new and shiny. Heck, getting developers not to rewrite an application in their new favorite framework is a tough sell.

LLM “vibe coding” is another continuation of this “new hotness”, and while the more seasoned developers may have learned to avoid it, that’s not the majority view.

CEOs and C-suites have always been disconnected from the first order effects of their cost-cutting edicts, and vibe coding is no different in that regard. They see the ten dollars an hour they spend on LLMs as a bargain if they can hire a $30 an hour junior programmer instead of a $150 an hour senior programmer.

They will continue to pursue cost-cutting, and the advent of vibe coding matches exactly what they care about: software produced for a fraction of the cost.

Our problem — or the problem of the professionals - is that we have not been successful in translating the inherent problems with the CEOs approach to a change in how the C-suite operates. We have not successfully pursuaded them that higher quality software = more sales, or lower liability, or lower cost maintenance, and that partially because we as an industry have eschewed those for “move fast and break things”. Vibe coding is “Move Fast and Break Things” writ large.

Re: Writing Code Was Never the Bottleneck

#95

Even without LLMs, we were approaching a point of saturation where software development was bottlenecked by market demand and funding, not by a shortage of code. Our tooling has become so powerful that the pure act of programming is secondary. It's a world away from when the industry began. There's a great story from Bill Gates about a time when his ability to simply write code was an incredibly scarce resource. A co…

>Even without LLMs, we were approaching a point of saturation where software development was bottlenecked by market demand and funding, not by a shortage of code I think it's credible to say that it was just market demand. Marc Andreessen's main complaint before the AI boom was that "there is more capital available than there are good ideas to fund". Personally, I think that's out of touch with reality, but he's the…

[deleted]

Re: Writing Code Was Never the Bottleneck

#96

My most recent example of this is mentoring young, ambitious, but inexperienced interns. Not only did they produce about the same amount of code in a day that they used to produce in a week (or two), several other things made my work harder than before: - During review, they hadn't thought as deeply about their code so my comments seemed to often go over their heads. Instead of a discussion I'd get something like "go…

I have a team that’s somewhat junior at a big company. We pretty much have everyone “vibe plan” significantly more than vibe code. - you need to think through the product more, really be sure it’s as clarified as it can be. Everyone has their own process, but it looks like rubber ducking, critiquing, breaking work into phases, those into tasks, etc. (jobs to be done, business requirement docs, domain driven design pl…

“We typically making very very detailed plans” - this is writing code in English without tests. Admittedly, since generating code is faster, you get faster feedback. Still, I do not think it as efficient as an incremental, test driven approach. Here you can optimize early on for the feedback loop.

Re: Writing Code Was Never the Bottleneck

#98

I will disagree with the author. If you look from the lenses of BigTech and corporations, yes code was not a bottleneck. But, if you look from the perspective of startups, rigorous planning was because resources to produce features were limited, which means producing a working code was a bottleneck, because in small teams you don't have coordination overhead, idea and vision is clear for them -> to produce something…

What I've seen is exactly this, that LLMs give the most leverage to small and highly capable teams of devs. You need to be highly capable in order to get good output from LLMs, and large teams still have the coordination overhead that slows them down. LLMs supercharge the small teams that were already good.

Re: Writing Code Was Never the Bottleneck

#99
A bit more interesting is slightly inverse to this. What will win in the next 10 years?

IMO expectations are now so high from users that you need to create websites, apps, auth, payment integration, customer supoort forums and chats. And this is to break the ice and have a good footing for the business to move forward. You could see how this is a problem for a non technical person. Nobody will hire someone to do all that as it will be prohibitively expensive. AI is not for the engineers, it is a “good enough” for folks that do not understand the code.

A lot depends on where the money will be invested, and what will consumers like as well. I bet the current wave of ai coding will morph into other spheres to try and improve efficiency.

Re: Writing Code Was Never the Bottleneck

#100
I woke up saying “no” into my pillow over and over again this morning about this problem.

There are two ways forward:

- Those of us that have been vibing revert to having LLMs generate code in small bits that our brains are fast enough to analyze and process, but LLMs are increasingly optimized to create code that is better and better, making it seem like this is a poor use of time, since “LLMs will just rewrite it in a few months.”

- We just have a hell of a time, in a bad way, some of us losing our jobs, because the code looks well-thought out but wasn’t, at ever increasing scale.

I have wavered over the past months in my attitude after having used it to much success in some cases and having gotten in over my head in beautiful crap in the more important ones.

I have (too) many years of experience, and have existed on a combination of good enough, clear enough code with consideration for the future along with a decent level of understanding, trust in people, and distrust in scenarios.

But this situation is flogging what remains of me. Developers are being mentored by something that cannot mentor and yet it does, and there is no need for me, not in a way that matters to them.

I believe that I’ll be fired, and when I am, I may take one or both of two roads:

1. I’ll continue to use LLMs on my own hoping that something will be created that feeds my family and pays the bills, eventually taking another job where I get fired again, because my mind isn’t what it was.

2. I do one of the few manual labor jobs that require no reasoning and are accepting of a slow and unreliable neurodivergent, if there are any; I don’t think there truly are.

I’ve been close to #2 before. I learned that almost everything that is dear to you relies on your functioning a certain way. I believe that I can depend on God to be there for me, but beyond that, I know that it’s on me. I’m responsible for what I can do.

LLMs and those AIs that come after them to do the same- they can’t fill the hole in others’ lives the way that you can, even if you’re a piece of shit like I am.

So, maybe LLMs write puzzling code as they puzzle out our inane desires and needs. Maybe we lose our jobs. Maybe we hobble along slowly creating decent code. It doesn’t matter. What matters is that you be you and be your best, and support others.

Post reply on HN