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

We charge $10k a week to delete AI-generated code

odra.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 263 posts

Re: We charge $10k a week to delete AI-generated code

#81

Post by rustystump »

llm_nerd wrote: post #40
martin1975 wrote: post #35

I guess it was only a matter of time before this niche of business developed. AI is an imprecise "programming" language, full of ambiguity (English) trying to produce precise relationships between different concepts. It certainly works great on small scale, building block type of things, but the more a project grows in complexity, components, interfacing with other heterogenous systems in other languages or APIs, und…

> I guess it was only a matter of time before this niche of business developed. This is a fun webpage, and it feeds a certain bias, but there really isn't a "niche" beyond getting people to upvote it for the lulz. I would be extremely surprised if they find a single paying customer. And to be fair, lots of grifters have done the fake it till you make it act on HN, so someone saying "Oh I'm totally going to give them…

Ahh yes the “you’re holding it wrong defense”. Now i ask what enormous extremely complicated projects…excuse me by projects we mean real production software with real scale.

Sure, it can poke one system or another but even with opus and now fable, it very quickly hits the limit a limit that tracks very closely with context window.

This is to say that no amount of harness tool skill is going to cover that fundamental gap. If your change fits in context, good chance it will work.

Re: We charge $10k a week to delete AI-generated code

#82

Post by thraway3837 »

nvr219 wrote: post #54
blanched wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we ask AI to reference that ticket, code to it, and create a PR > none of them have read any more than a few lines of code So what do you / your team do?

Mostly post on hacker news.

Haha, I actually laughed out loud, thank you for that :)

Re: We charge $10k a week to delete AI-generated code

#83

Post by subscribed »

jayd16 wrote: post #61
thraway3837 wrote: post #39

We replaced a 120,000 USD/year low-code/no-code platform that was running a lot of workflows. And we have another platform that is also similar that we are on track to replace by EOY. Both have been replaced by "vibe" coding. It works well. Everyone's happy. People are having fun with it. We get feature requests, improvements, ideas, feedback. JIRA tickets get created, and we ask AI to reference that ticket, code to…

So wait are you saying you replaced an online tool with a local vibe coded app? Is it a web app with vibe ops? What's running all of the workflows now? Are you vibe provisioning new cloud instances? Or does everything run on local machines now?

I used CF Wrkers because I wanted to try serverless(1) - I just needed a tiny https proxy for one of my personal scripts and.... It turned out to be super fun.

And no surprise bills.

(1) after my earlier experience with AWS lambda - almost no traffic (few requests per day), on free trier and YET I had to pay for the add-on they automatically added (and it took me almost 2 hours to find all the rhizomes that were proudly anticipating another few £ for pretty much zero traffic).

Re: We charge $10k a week to delete AI-generated code

#84

Post by MangoCoffee »

zie1ony wrote: post #2

Creator here, There is a new kind of task for software engineers these days. A client calls, asks for a "small refactor," and sends you 100k lines of AI-generated spaghetti. And this is great! This is something we can work with. Any experienced engineer can look at a codebase like that and quickly see what to refactor, where a library replaces a few thousand hand-rolled lines, and what smells bad. Removing the first…

its no difference than US team fixing slop written by outsource company from India. where do you think LLMs learn slop code from?

Re: We charge $10k a week to delete AI-generated code

#88

Post by singingtoday »

jayd16 wrote: post #61
thraway3837 wrote: post #39

We replaced a 120,000 USD/year low-code/no-code platform that was running a lot of workflows. And we have another platform that is also similar that we are on track to replace by EOY. Both have been replaced by "vibe" coding. It works well. Everyone's happy. People are having fun with it. We get feature requests, improvements, ideas, feedback. JIRA tickets get created, and we ask AI to reference that ticket, code to…

So wait are you saying you replaced an online tool with a local vibe coded app? Is it a web app with vibe ops? What's running all of the workflows now? Are you vibe provisioning new cloud instances? Or does everything run on local machines now?

We did at my work. We were paying too much for low code orchestration software. Replaced it with vibe coded workflows. Still have some infra costs but it's fantastic, cheaper, more velocity, and everybody is happy.

Re: We charge $10k a week to delete AI-generated code

#89

Post by singingtoday »

xmprt wrote: post #52
llm_nerd wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I guess it was only a matter of time before this niche of business developed. This is a fun webpage, and it feeds a certain bias, but there really isn't a "niche" beyond getting people to upvote it for the lulz. I would be extremely surprised if they find a single paying customer. And to be fair, lots of grifters have done the fake it till you make it act on HN, so someone saying "Oh I'm totally going to give them…

> I've had tremendous productivity using AI on some enormous and extremely complex projects, courtesy of modularization, separation of concerns, explicit APIs, and so on. The problem I've had with AI systems is that they eventually realize it's possible to solve a problem by linking together two separate systems in subtle ways that result in spaghettification of good code. It takes active effort to get them to follow…

This is the gotcha here and the solution is to tell it how it should architect the software and what integration points it should use. But if you clearly define integration boundaries, the success condition, and a few other small details, it generally does a pretty good job.
Post reply on HN