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

Making

beej.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 194 posts

Re: Making

#171

Post by inigyou »

subscribed wrote: post #167
wlesieutre wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> don’t tell me I did not “make” it because it simply would not exist if I hadn’t created it. So like when I went to a restaurant last week and "made" a cheeseburger with no lettuce and extra onions, because it wouldn't exist if I hadn't created it. To me, making something can mean you did the physical work of its creation even if there's no particular creative expression, like "I made a peanut butter and jelly sandw…

So you did not build a wardrobe unless you cut, dried and sliced your tree yourself, and used muscle powered tools. Power tools or buying kiln-dried planks is forbidden, you might as well go to IKEA, buy you set and claim you "built" it. You cannot also claim you built a custom sensor for your smart home if you based it on ESP32 and any of the ecosystem tooling. You might as well buy it from Phillips or Siemens if it…

No, that is not what GP said. That is, in fact, the opposite of what GP said.

Re: Making

#172

Post by inigyou »

wsng wrote: post #168
applfanboysbgon wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nobody bickers about the definition of "photograph". Uh, yeah, because there's nothing to bicker about in the definition of a photograph itself. But people absolutely do not view photographers the same way they view illustrators. Nobody would ever, in a million years, consider you an artist because you snapped a selfie. You also don't "make" a photograph, you "take" a photograph (and this kind of distinction exists…

Photographs now are presented in museums as work of art, and their creators are considered as artists. And me skribbling an illustration on a piece of paper doesn’t make me an artist the same way taking a selfie doesn’t make me an artist. That shows that something being art and someone being an artist has nothing to do with the medium and the used tools.

Photographs presented as works of art have something about the choice of what and how to photograph that is artistic. I can't just, like, take a photo of my leg and call it art. At least not without writing a thought-provoking blurb about is a photo of a leg really art? Then it becomes artistic parody, like the toilet sculpture.

Re: Making

#173

Post by Pigo »

I've been trying to rebuild my back deck this summer. I've wasted so much material, cut myself several times, and I was stung by a paper wasp, it has not been going well so far.

Re: Making

#174

Post by z0ltan »

planb wrote: post #20

I know many people agree but I can’t really follow this sentiment. I can still take pride in something I “made” with an LLM even if I did not write a single line of code for it. I wouldn’t show it around and proclaim what a great programmer I am, because I did not program it, but coding was never the main goal, it was always the means to create the finished end product. When I plan a remake of my garden and then hire…

[dead]

Re: Making

#175

Post by jjice »

Pigo wrote: post #173

I've been trying to rebuild my back deck this summer. I've wasted so much material, cut myself several times, and I was stung by a paper wasp, it has not been going well so far.

But hopefully you'll feel very accomplished once it's finished and you can enjoy the fruits of your labor!

Re: Making

#176

Post by austinthetaco »

ModernMech wrote: post #42
jscd wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the "would not exist if I hadn't created it" argument really works. If I delegate a project to someone else, and they do the project, does that mean I did it? In my mind, I could comfortably say I managed it, or I designed some parts of it, but I really couldn't take the credit for actually doing it. You wanted it to be done, so you asked someone to do it. If anything, I would say your conclusion should…

What about a director of a movie. They aren't responsible for the creative performances but they are certainly given a heap of credit for having made the movie. I ask 10 actors for 10 scenes and I combine them into a movie I wanted. I ask 10 agents for 10 functions and I combine them into a program I wanted. What's the difference and why is the guy who used agents not credited the same way as a director? Maybe all th…

It's the level of effort and involvement (also if you listen to any director talk they will never say "I made", they will say "we made"). Similarly to AI, nobody gives credit to the guy who "thought of the idea for the movie", they give credit to the leadership of the movie who worked alongside the crew. Directors dont just give an outline of a movie and then step away from set, they put real effort in to every aspect.

Re: Making

#177

Post by austinthetaco »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #118
sashank_1509 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you didn’t solve anything. AI solved it. If you go to a coffee shop and ask extra ice, less sugar, more vanilla - did you make the coffee or the barista make the coffe and you just gave some requests to him. Using an LLM is far more similar to ordering coffee from a barista than it is to actually making the coffee. Of course the barista didn’t make the seeds, the milk etc. This is not an exact lawyerly statement.…

If an expert barista goes to a coffee shop and orders a coffee, do they get a better quality coffee? Because it's a common experience of folks using LLMs to code (and other activities) that experts get better results than non-experts. So it definitely suggests that the human is part of the making process, not just the recipient of the finished product as in your coffee example.

yes, they would, they still didnt make the coffee though. They would likely get banned from said coffee shop if they then went around the room claiming they made the coffee.

Re: Making

#178

Post by corysama »

sashank_1509 wrote: post #113
corysama wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm the opposite. Between work and family, I don't get a lot of time to hole up in a cave with an IDE for fun. Prior to LLMs, it was a struggle to get much of anything done. So, I rarely tried. But, now I can get ideas fleshed out and even get code down in the small breaks I get to myself. Now I'm making progress where I wasn't before. Sometimes I'm not interested in the inner workings of a technology, I just want a…

I feel the divide is between people who built something for the joy of building vs people who built something for the joy of consuming (like you). For you LLM’s are great, you can spend less time, effort and still enjoy all the stuff you wanted to enjoy. For someone who actually liked the process of building, LLMs don’t do anything except at worst muddy the market with AI generated slop that needs to be compared agai…

For the joy of building, I'd say LLMs are still great for questions, rapid-prototyping and code reviews. And, beyond that: Who cares what others do? Build what brings you joy.

As @petecordell put it: "Telling a programmer there's already a library to do X is like telling a songwriter there's already a song about love."

Re: Making

#179

Post by subscribed »

inigyou wrote: post #171
subscribed wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you did not build a wardrobe unless you cut, dried and sliced your tree yourself, and used muscle powered tools. Power tools or buying kiln-dried planks is forbidden, you might as well go to IKEA, buy you set and claim you "built" it. You cannot also claim you built a custom sensor for your smart home if you based it on ESP32 and any of the ecosystem tooling. You might as well buy it from Phillips or Siemens if it…

No, that is not what GP said. That is, in fact, the opposite of what GP said.

That's pretty much what they said: unless you "make" something, preferably by hand and without using advanced tools, maybe you didn't make it at all.

They were using restaurant and customised burger example to refute the claim that using LLM to assist with building solutions (applications) is building and making.

I only dialed their extreme to the further extreme, just on the adjacent plane.

Re: Making

#180

Post by InitialBP »

jimbokun wrote: post #121
InitialBP wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The restaurant comparison doesn't really hold up. The parent didn't go choose from a menu of new apps that they wanted AI to create. They discovered a problem or a feature that doesn't exist on other platforms and they employed tools to create that. Does a product manager not get to claim they "made" something because they plan it out and employ others to actually build the finished product? Both of the examples the…

No, product managers do not get to claim they made something. They led a team that made something.

Let me correct this then: "Do product managers get to claim that they helped to make something?"

I think product managers surely have a right to claim they "helped" to make something at least. If the team made something then those who work on the team all assisted in "making" the thing.

Post reply on HN