21–30 of 237 posts
Regardless, knowing syntax of programming language or remember some library API, is a dead business.
> Software development, as it has been done for decades, is over. I'm pretty sure the way I was doing things in 2005 was completely different compared to 2015. Same for 2015 and 2025. I'm not old enough to know how they were doing things in 1995, but I'm pretty sure there very different compared to 2005. For sure, we are going through some big changes, but there is no "as it has been done for decades".
> Software development, as it has been done for decades, is over. I'm pretty sure the way I was doing things in 2005 was completely different compared to 2015. Same for 2015 and 2025. I'm not old enough to know how they were doing things in 1995, but I'm pretty sure there very different compared to 2005. For sure, we are going through some big changes, but there is no "as it has been done for decades".
I don't think things have changed that much in the time I've been doing it (roughly 20 years). Tools have evolved and new things were added but the core workflow of a developer has more or less stayed the same.
Agile has completely changed things, for better or for worse.
Being a SWE today is nothing like 30 years ago, for me. I much preferred the earlier days as well, as it felt far more engineered and considered as opposed to much of the MVP 'productivity' of today.
> Software development, as it has been done for decades, is over. I'm pretty sure the way I was doing things in 2005 was completely different compared to 2015. Same for 2015 and 2025. I'm not old enough to know how they were doing things in 1995, but I'm pretty sure there very different compared to 2005. For sure, we are going through some big changes, but there is no "as it has been done for decades".
I don't think things have changed that much in the time I've been doing it (roughly 20 years). Tools have evolved and new things were added but the core workflow of a developer has more or less stayed the same.
I also don't feel less productive or lacking in anything compared to the newer developers I know (including some LLM users) so I don't think I am obsolete either.
> Ignoring outright bad code, in a world where functional code is so abundant that “good” and “bad” are indistinguishable, ultimately, what makes functional AI code slop or non-slop? I'm sorry, but this is an indicator for me that the author hasn't had a critical eye for quality in some time. There is massive overlap between "bad" and "functional." More than ever. The barrier-to-entry to programming got irresponsibly…
I'd think there'll be a dip in code quality (compared to human) initially due to "AI machinery" due to its immaturity. But over-time on a mass-scale - we are going to see an improvement in the quality of software artifacts.
It is easier to 'discipline' the top 5 AI agents in the planet - rather than try to get a million distributed devs ("artisans") to produce high quality results.
It's like in the clothing or manufacturing industry I think. Artisans were able to produce better individual results than the average industry machinery, at least initially. But overtime - industry machinery could match the average artisan or even beat the average, while decisively beating in scale, speed, energy efficiency and so on.
I keep on wondering how much of the AI embrace is marketing driven. Yes, it can produce value and cut corners. But it seems like self driving by 2016 Musk prediction. Which never happened. With IPO/Stock valuations closely tied to hype, I wonder if we are all witnessing a giant bubble in the making How much of this is mass financial engineering than real value. Reading a lot of nudges how everyone should have Google…
The original phrase "talk is cheap" is generally used to mean "it's easy to say a whole lot of shit and that talk often has no real value." So this cleaver headline is telling me the code has even less value than the talk. That alone betrays a level of ignorance I would expect from the author's work. I go to read the article and it confirmed my suspicion.
Did you get very far in? They're referring to a pretty specific contextual usage of the phrase (Linus, back in 2000), not the adage as a whole.
> One can no longer know whether such a repository was “vibe” coded by a non-technical person who has never written a single line of code, or an experienced developer, who may or may not have used LLM assistance.
I am talking about what it means to invert that phrase.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think things have changed that much in the time I've been doing it (roughly 20 years). Tools have evolved and new things were added but the core workflow of a developer has more or less stayed the same.
I also wonder what those people have been doing all this time... I also have been mostly working as a developer for about 20 years and I don't think much has changed at all. I also don't feel less productive or lacking in anything compared to the newer developers I know (including some LLM users) so I don't think I am obsolete either.
Yes I know, Lisp could do this the whole time. Feel free to offer me a Lisp job drive-by Lisp person.