Live data from Hacker News

AI changes the economics of software rewrites

thetruthasiseeitnow.com

81–90 of 113 posts

Re: AI changes the economics of software rewrites

#81
post #7

It also changes the economics of buy vs build.

Much less if you consider buy vs build+maintain.

I think your underlying point is correct, but "buy" is also "buy+maintain." There's a real cost to keeping up with dependency upgrades, especially for big frameworks that like to change their fundamental public-facing API every few years.

Re: AI changes the economics of software rewrites

#82

This website has four articles, once daily, three of which being AI crap and doomsaying (the fourth arguably too, it just doesn't say so), all with lines like: > A fast car doesn't win races — a driver does > the gap is not just speed - it's output quality > A rewrite isn't just an opportunity to modernise your technology stack - it's an opportunity [...] Garbage.

The "Written by hand." in the footer hurts my brain. If it is written using real thoughts and ideas formed by themselves, they've fully imbued their brain with that AI stank I guess. It really does FEEL like unedited LLM output.

You can find a few smoking guns or em a few dashes, whatever. But every sentence is emanating the stank.

Re: AI changes the economics of software rewrites

#83

This website has four articles, once daily, three of which being AI crap and doomsaying (the fourth arguably too, it just doesn't say so), all with lines like: > A fast car doesn't win races — a driver does > the gap is not just speed - it's output quality > A rewrite isn't just an opportunity to modernise your technology stack - it's an opportunity [...] Garbage.

The "Written by hand." in the footer hurts my brain. If it is written using real thoughts and ideas formed by themselves, they've fully imbued their brain with that AI stank I guess. It really does FEEL like unedited LLM output. You can find a few smoking guns or em a few dashes, whatever. But every sentence is emanating the stank.

you don't need to be an LLM to have LinkedIn brain, but it helps

Re: AI changes the economics of software rewrites

#84
I don't think it does. (meaningfully change the economics of rewrites)

Burning a sea of tokens to arrive at the equivalent functionality and having a small team of people oversee that process is rarely going to be the fix to the organizational problems that surround typical failed/stagnant software projects.

Rewrites are rarely about the organization of the symbols and are more often about a change in the fundamental understanding of the organization about the problem they've solving. Remember: People change slowly.

People are often too tied to the idea of "rewrite" as a replay of all current capabilities, but should instead be thinking about fundamentally different primitive capabilities of the system. It's not a "redo" if you're changing some of your fundamental assumptions about the problem space.

Re: AI changes the economics of software rewrites

#85

This website has four articles, once daily, three of which being AI crap and doomsaying (the fourth arguably too, it just doesn't say so), all with lines like: > A fast car doesn't win races — a driver does > the gap is not just speed - it's output quality > A rewrite isn't just an opportunity to modernise your technology stack - it's an opportunity [...] Garbage.

> Garbage

It's not just garbage — it's AI slop garbage.

Re: AI changes the economics of software rewrites

#86
post #84

I don't think it does. (meaningfully change the economics of rewrites) Burning a sea of tokens to arrive at the equivalent functionality and having a small team of people oversee that process is rarely going to be the fix to the organizational problems that surround typical failed/stagnant software projects. Rewrites are rarely about the organization of the symbols and are more often about a change in the fundamental…

I assumed LLMs should be able to rewrite a small amount of code ~5k dense LoC in Ruby to Rust.

It could not.

I suspect you'll see a wave of transpilers developed to mostly transpile code from one language to another.

You can have an LLM generate a 1-2k or so LoC transpiler that can translate 50%+ of code in place from most languages to another.

After doing that, it was able to actually get the job done relatively quickly.

I'm working on self-hosting a programming language I've been developing. The transpiler from the original language to the host language is ~12k LoC and translates ~99% the original compiler's ~80k LoC cleanly.

The total self-host looks like it might only take a couple of weeks and <$100... TBD.

Re: AI changes the economics of software rewrites

#87

This website has four articles, once daily, three of which being AI crap and doomsaying (the fourth arguably too, it just doesn't say so), all with lines like: > A fast car doesn't win races — a driver does > the gap is not just speed - it's output quality > A rewrite isn't just an opportunity to modernise your technology stack - it's an opportunity [...] Garbage.

I’m not an AI skeptic by any means. But I can easily recognize GPT generated output. It’s so formulaic. Of course you’d expect it to be formulaic given what it’s doing under the hood. But it does take the sheen off how impressive the written output looks the first time you see it. And I wonder if it points in the direction of limits on what it can ultimately do.

Re: AI changes the economics of software rewrites

#88

This website has four articles, once daily, three of which being AI crap and doomsaying (the fourth arguably too, it just doesn't say so), all with lines like: > A fast car doesn't win races — a driver does > the gap is not just speed - it's output quality > A rewrite isn't just an opportunity to modernise your technology stack - it's an opportunity [...] Garbage.

> Garbage It's not just garbage — it's AI slop garbage.

Exactly. You've hit the nail on the head.

And quite frankly, your AI slop garbage radar is not just an indicator of good taste — it's the essence of humanity that keeps you above it.

Re: AI changes the economics of software rewrites

#89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Garbage It's not just garbage — it's AI slop garbage.

Exactly. You've hit the nail on the head. And quite frankly, your AI slop garbage radar is not just an indicator of good taste — it's the essence of humanity that keeps you above it.

One caveat worth flagging: Your AI slop garbage radar won't work on food (no em-dashes, no "it's not X, it's Y" framing, just quiche). That's a real limitation, so calling it out matters. You weren't considering using it on food, but it's important to note that it won't work in order to burn more tokens. I mean provide you with a well rounded answer.

Want me to plan an app that detects food made from AI recipes?

Re: AI changes the economics of software rewrites

#90
While the article is terrible, what they describe about AI knowing common stacks and frameworks is advice that holds for finding software developers to join your team. Like, 1-for-1. It has always been good advice unless you have a strong justification go in a different direction.

Use standard tools, standard frameworks, standing patterns, standard protocols, and so on, and it's incredibly easy to find highly talented members to join your team, running on day one, and enjoy the progress of the industry. It's quite a different tale when you have some massive internal "framework" monstrosity, have weird patterns and standards, and so on, and these are the sorts of places where you usually find some half-baked terrible custom coding language and so on.

Post reply on HN