Live data from Hacker News

Software for One

ajwaxman.com

111–120 of 301 posts

Re: Software for One

#111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're suggesting you won't need an IDE and a VM to build a service, for example. You'll just prompt your LLM provider and they'll provision your software. It'll do testing, dependency updates, monitoring, and regular audits. If you want fixes/features, you'll prompt your LLM and it'll make it so.

> If you want fixes/features, you'll prompt your LLM and it'll make it so. I've been using the agents since the day they came out. This, does not work. It works if you want an app that looks like it works if that works without any testing. If you use the app in any way that isn't boiler plate it will break. Because you can't prompt ai with a simple feature no matter how small and have it cover all the important cases…

I'm not a sophisticated LLM user, but nor do I have tricky usecases.

Opus 4.5 with a plan mode is enough for me: it asks clarifying questions to map out the design space, it covers fiddly parts, it generates good unit/integration tests.

I have seen it cheat by deleting existing tests, since it's single-mindedly focused on the problem I give it. I've not used an LLM-to-review-an-LLM, but when I've used an LLM to review my own work, it notices when there are unrelated changes in my commit/working copy.

Besides, all of your critique is how I've heard product managers speak of human developers! And a tool needn't be perfect for it to be useful.

Re: Software for One

#112
post #15

Things I've built in the last month or so: * A personal music player for Apple Music with an embedded agent loop, so I can say things like "I'm going to work in the wood shop, play woodworking-appropriate music and keep the playlist full and non-repeating indefinitely". * A calorie/protein tracker that takes 1-liner summaries of meals, resolves them to macros with GPT5 calls, and tracks them in SQLite. * A macOS menu…

> A personal music player for Apple Music with an embedded agent loop, so I can say things like "I'm going to work in the wood shop, play woodworking-appropriate music and keep the playlist full and non-repeating indefinitely". how is AI (or a human for that matter) supposed to know what “woodworking-appropriate music is”? I had the same thoughts when spotify released their “let AI make a playlist for you”. Like, we…

> we already have recommender algorithms, why do we need to get a LLM involved

and we had autocomplete for coding (IntelliSense), why do we need to get LLM involved?

LLMs are at a whole different level than recommender algorithms

tried it with GPT:

> A steady mix of instrumental grooves, classic rock, and bluegrass—styles commonly favored in woodshops.

Green Onions - Booker T. & the M.G.’s

Up Around the Bend - Creedence Clearwater Revival

Jessica - The Allman Brothers Band

Long Train Runnin - The Doobie Brothers

Honey on My Tongue - Steep Canyon Rangers

Re: Software for One

#113
I've got a few of these.

There's one in particular that I use quite often and have for about a year, vibed for myself: it's a chat interface that walks you through processing an emotional or difficult moment, following a process / workflow. Supports Martin Seligman's ABCDE and Byron Katie's "The Work". Two techniques that I found most useful to improve my thinking and responses to difficult situations. You converse with it, and it leads you through the stages of the selected flow. More than a system prompt - it tracks and progresses through the workflow at the right times, and you download a consistent pdf of key details from the "session" at the end for your records.

The thing is, I can't sell it. I don't even think I can open source it. It's mental health (minefield of legal and ethical issues), and would probably breach copyright, trademark etc law.

Yet it's very useful to me. I guess it's the equivalent of making a system to do these things at home, like prompt cards or key points taken from the books, with a well formatted note taking structure. Except it's way easier because you just chat like you're talking to someone.

I would never have spent time building this. But now it's so cheap and easy to do.

Re: Software for One

#114
post #15

Things I've built in the last month or so: * A personal music player for Apple Music with an embedded agent loop, so I can say things like "I'm going to work in the wood shop, play woodworking-appropriate music and keep the playlist full and non-repeating indefinitely". * A calorie/protein tracker that takes 1-liner summaries of meals, resolves them to macros with GPT5 calls, and tracks them in SQLite. * A macOS menu…

I feel on the opposite side of a divide when I see these kinds of comments here about people creating bespoke software to address deficiencies they perceive in their daily lives. There's an engineer mindset that tools can solve any and every problem, but do they? Are you quantifiably any fitter than you were before? Better bloodwork, BMI, body fat percentage, anything? Are you creating better wooden goods? More wooden goods? If you track mood in any way, are you at least consistently happier while working because of the auto-generated playlists? Have you gotten any better at math thanks to the pdfs?

When I reflect on my own life and think about why I'm not personally adopting LLMs for anything, it occurs to me that I just don't feel like I have any problems like this to address. I was already eating appropriately, already working out appropriately, already happy with the music I listen to, already happy with the way I learn and practice math. I could make a billion personalized apps, but I was already a two-time state champion in cross-country and track who has never been overweight, got perfect scores on the SAT and GRE, won regional academic olympics in math, all before mobile apps existed and before I ever owned a personal computer of any kind. That's not to say I can't do even better than I did as a teenager in the 90s and I try to maintain some proficiency in these things into middle age, but it never occurs to me that I need or should need software to help me with this. I have no clue what the temperature is right now of any room in my house, but I know they're all in a comfortable range that isn't hurting any machinery or animal and that seems good enough to me.

I see all these enthusiastic booster posts and comments about all the tools you can make, but I don't feel like what is missing from my life is I don't have enough tools. I wasn't sitting around prior to GPT-3 thinking to myself "you know what would improve my life? More software." There are deficiencies and problems to address for sure, but it's mostly issues of prioritization and motivation. I have fallen off the wagon a bit this year and don't exercise nearly as much as I should. I don't talk to my wife enough. I don't talk to other friends at all. I don't go outside enough. But those aren't problems to address with software, either. If anything, if I spent more time making software, even with LLMs, that would be more time not going outside, talking to my wife, or working out. No matter how much raw output I could get computers to output, more time spent fiddling with computers is not going to improve my life. I shouldn't even be here right now, reading and commenting on Hacker News. The sun will be up and it will be 90 degrees fahrenheit within an hour of that. This is my last chance of the day to go run without feeling extremely uncomfortable while doing so.

This isn't a "oh my God look at me I'm so much better than you" comment or at least that's not what I'm trying to get across. But I'd encourage the original poster here and you as well to be outcome-oriented. My weight isn't in a warning zone. This guy is posting stats, so I am leaner than he is and my marathon time is faster, all without the aid of any tracking apps. You're a public figure, so I know you're in the same time zone as me, which means you were posting your own comment at midnight last night, midnight on a Friday night reading Hacker News. My sleep isn't perfect, but I'm not reading Hacker News at midnight on a Friday. Are all these apps actually making your life better?

Re: Software for One

#115
Since the advent of these coding assistants, I gathered a list of software tool ideas I usually discarded due to lack of time. No more! Main one on that list: grocery assistant, with a barcode scanner for empty packaging to order new stuff, inventory management, coupling to recipes and most importantly: automatic ordering for delivery.

There's existing stuff for this but making a personal extension to this should be very well possible too.

Re: Software for One

#116
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Things like this are easy with a simple agent loop. To be fair, they’re also easy (trivial, even) without one. It’s not like “play more music like this” is something we ever needed AI for.

> It’s not like “play more music like this” is something we ever needed AI for. Borderline off-topic, but I love how fast the goal post moves. A decade or two ago "Similar music to this" was definitively in the realm of AI/ML, now it's some full-stack dev's afternoon to implement.

I don‘t think someone disputes that this is in the realm of AI/ML. I just think its questionable if this kind of usecase is genuinely something were an LLM is necessary or outshines the more traditional approaches

Re: Software for One

#117
It is never really for "One". If it is open source and published, It may be use by others... not to mention coding AI ML (Machine Learing), then for many.

I have written so much software for one... I cannot recall everything. I use some of it daily:

- I have my custom elf(glibc)/linux distro

- I use my own ffmpeg based x11 media player (will have an update for wayland).

- Since the "geniuses" at gogol blocked all accounts not using whatwg cartel web engines and blocked all self-hosted SMTP servers (I do not pay the DNS mob, then IP literals, which is stronger than SPF) to exchange with gmail.com users (now prisoners), I have my very own simple noscript/basic HTML servers (messaging, file transfer, openstreetmap browsing, etc). Unfortunately, most are C written from linux instead of assembly (at least, I removed most of the time the libc dependency with direct syscall programming). IPv6 is making everything internet software muuuuuuch easier to implement: I am lurking at an IPv6 only, super idiotic and real time voice/video/text/file transfer protocol, probably based on SIP (the main issue are randomly generated IPv6 addresses from mobile internet, which may require a mini-server for IPv6 address exchange, BAAAAAAAD!).

- Ofc, I still have my own minimal SMTP server (and a SMTP client to send emails), because there are still honnest people on internet. mutt forever.

- I am trying to build a RCS for linux, aka a Reduced Command Set with near direct hardwiring to linux syscalls. I lose comfort, but knowing that I removed giga tons of bloat feels so much satisfying it is worth it by light years. I will have to code my own command shell one day.

I still have C code since I currently need portability on IP-LOCKED ISAs (arm and x86-64). But I wish for RISC-V to be a success, namely as a modern, very often hitting the 'sweet spot' in technical design compromises, NON-IP-LOCKED ISA. I am writting much software in RISC-V assembly now... which I run on x86-64 with a small interpreter (written in x86-64 assembly)... trying to fix the bloat and kludge from corpo-like open source software (including the SDK).

Right now, I am writting my own wayland compositor using that framework. I was not expecting window management to be a bazillion of little things to do everywhere. And even if a wayland compositor is several orders of magnitude smaller and leaner than a x11 server, it ain't that a small project (ofc, I implemented myself the wayland wire protocol, no external libs here).

In my 'trying to fix the bloat and kludge' from corpo-like open source, I force myself to use my own exe/dynamic lib format for modern hardware (so lean, a simple RFC will be enough, and no more loader bloat/kludge). But I am scared at the abominations which are all the requirements of classic computer languages to run: I would like a mesa vulkan driver, but there is still c++ (super BAD) in there which makes porting to an alternative dynamic lib format a living hell, non trivial C won't be that easy neither (for instance the abomination of the ISO __thread keyword, amazing bright minds there). Taking perspective from that, I wonder why anybody sane would add on top of that a big runtime requirement??

And what people doing that have to keep in mind: IRL can put a violent stop to all of this.

Re: Software for One

#119
post #15

Things I've built in the last month or so: * A personal music player for Apple Music with an embedded agent loop, so I can say things like "I'm going to work in the wood shop, play woodworking-appropriate music and keep the playlist full and non-repeating indefinitely". * A calorie/protein tracker that takes 1-liner summaries of meals, resolves them to macros with GPT5 calls, and tracks them in SQLite. * A macOS menu…

I feel on the opposite side of a divide when I see these kinds of comments here about people creating bespoke software to address deficiencies they perceive in their daily lives. There's an engineer mindset that tools can solve any and every problem, but do they? Are you quantifiably any fitter than you were before? Better bloodwork, BMI, body fat percentage, anything? Are you creating better wooden goods? More woode…

[flagged]

Re: Software for One

#120
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This person seems insane. You don’t need to pay a “sleep consultant” to make a plan for your child’s nap times. It’s really not that complicated.

it's sleep training it is insane and unnatural but it is also common fundamentally capitalist concept contact napping to beyond 1yo is deeply natural and special

Let me share an anecdote from my soviet childhood.

Like most soviet children of the 80s, I was outsourced to my kindergarden each mom's workday.

I abolutely loathed everything about it, but the most fascist thing to my infant mind was the post-afternoon nap.

For the life of me, I just couldn't make myself fall asleep, and had to pretend, making extraordinary efforts to really look like sleeping.

We were literally scanned crib by crib, aisle by aisle by the surveilling nanny to detect sleep pretenders.

Those offenders of Morpheus who were caught red-handed, were routinely ordered to step out in front of the entire dorm, which of course was instantly awake and gleefully staring through eyelashes now, and do 20 humiliating squats.

Needless to say, that resulted in nothing but fierce hatred towards the soviet system, which treated children as future soldiers, and oppresion in general.

So let me disagree with you on day napping being a fundamentally capitalist thing, haha :)

The only difference is that it plants the seeds of hatred towards different entities - either the system or the parents.

Post reply on HN