Live data from Hacker News

AI doesn't generate working products, that's still your job

weeraman.com

191–200 of 317 posts

Re: AI doesn't generate working products, that's still your job

#191
post #110
post #24

The test is simple: have we seen great new products or improvements in the products we use over the past 12,24,36 months? The only great new product I’ve used is my LLM of choice, and those labs seem to be hiring more humans than ever. Maybe it’s true that Claude only just got good enough and that 12 months from now our day to day lives will be way better thanks to LLM-driven product improvements/breakthroughs. My be…

I have a similar one. Is Claude Code (web and/or VS Code) still a buggy mess? Pretty much every single agent loop bugs out and requires a hard refresh, which sometimes still doesn’t help. And they have an effectively infinite LLM budget and unreleased models to fix the issues.

[dead]

Re: AI doesn't generate working products, that's still your job

#192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you have to remember, 70 million people voted for the current US regime and many of them billionaires. The ability to delude ones self and not pay attention to the "facts on the code" is moumentally built into the human condition. Everyones experience is some unique snowflake of just how easy their mental gymnastics are.

> you have to remember, 70 million people voted for the current US regime and many of them billionaires. Many of the 70 million Republican voters were billionaires? What are you talking about?

"of the american billionaires who voted, many of them voted republican"

I get it, but it's not _that hard_ to parse.

Re: AI doesn't generate working products, that's still your job

#193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has happened to my side project too. There's so much going on in the code now that I can't possibly grok it to make changes safely by myself any more. But I think that's OK. Because I don't have to grok it anymore. I've been crafting beautiful code for almost 20 years - that itch is scratched. Now I just want to be productive and build cool stuff. AI is helping me make a better end-product in a fraction of the t…

> In the same way high-level languages are a layer on top of writing machine code manually. Another layer, yes, but NOT "in the same way." It is a new, different kind of layer. The other layers were deterministic, not probabilistic.

I meant that no-one writes assembly anymore. I wasn't around when that transition happened, but I bet there were the same "this high-level language is compiling to inefficient code, it's useless" comments.

Re: AI doesn't generate working products, that's still your job

#194
post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not a mess as in spaghetti code, which you will find with novice programmers. It’s a mess as in complex and disjointed codebase. Happy path works somewhat, but it crumbles if you run it long enough or encounters an edge case. You need a very good level of insight to build a codebase to do what is supposed to do, to not do what it shouldn’t do, and to still be comprehensible. Because a software is a system and bu…

Isn't "spaghetti code" a casual term to describe "complex and disjointed codebase"? What's the difference? Have I been using the term wrong all this time?

Not really. Spaghetti code is usually related to the big ball of mud. Meaning anything you need to understand, you need to go up and down the files while being distracted by irrelevant concerns. There’s no abstraction, no separation of concerns,…

Complex and disjointed codebase is the usual over engineering. The requirement calls for a quick printf, but the implemented module is equivalent to ncurses. And then every calling point turns into a complex ceremony. And most of them are subtly wrong in some way.

Those are two distinct mode of failures. The first was the sin of novice programmers before LLM. The second was the sin of not so novice programmers before LLMs, at least until the pain of living with their mistakes taught them better.

But with agentic tooling, the output is often the second. I believe mostly because no one publish the simple generic version of their codebase. Instead it’s the one that is aligned with their specs, simple in that context, but too complex in any other.

Re: AI doesn't generate working products, that's still your job

#195
post #120
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have been building complex software before and we continue to do so. The question is where is this mythical codebase 10 times more complex then the Linux kernel that we were previously unable to produce? Or let it just be complex software. Where is it? What are the names?

The real problem is that we forget that there was a lot of bad code in the early days. When I studied books from 10 to 15 years ago, the patterns that were considered 'common practice' back then would be considered low-quality code today. Our threshold has risen. People tend to forget the rings of experience embedded in community codebases and only look at the final results. And they always claim that only the best r…

Can you give an example of a pattern that was considered common practice in a book 10 to 15 years ago that would be considered low-quality code today?

My experience is pretty much the reverse: that we seem to just go round and round relearning the lessons that had already been learned in the past.

Re: AI doesn't generate working products, that's still your job

#196
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Then cry as the ai reveals that it didn't actually do anything close to what it said it did. If using AI to generate code, you told it generate some code, so it did. No amount of "You are an expert developer" or "Make no mistakes" will change the fact that it just generates tokens and has a limited thinking budget. Adversarial review loops of N parallel agents looking at whatever characteristics you care about will…

> Adversarial review loops of N parallel agents looking at whatever characteristics you care about will make it better Especially if different model providers. It becomes more like having team members that see things slightly differently.

It's like a variant of the halting problem though: given N agents in a review loop reviewing a codebase, will it ever terminate and say the thing is done and bug free?

It seems to me just from @codex review, given a codebase of any appreciable size, if you ask the agent to find things to fix, it'll find things to fix. And despite N agents agreeing that some code is ready to ship, I've still sat down to try it and nothing actually works as advertised.

So the need for better verification tools that are not AI is very urgent. Because the AI can be told to write a thing without mistakes, it does write code that compiles, N-agent AI review process fixes bugs and eventually the code is approved, and then run against an extensive suite of tests to prove certain functionality which all pass... and yet it still can be the case that nothing actually works in production.

Re: AI doesn't generate working products, that's still your job

#197
post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't "spaghetti code" a casual term to describe "complex and disjointed codebase"? What's the difference? Have I been using the term wrong all this time?

Not really. Spaghetti code is usually related to the big ball of mud. Meaning anything you need to understand, you need to go up and down the files while being distracted by irrelevant concerns. There’s no abstraction, no separation of concerns,… Complex and disjointed codebase is the usual over engineering. The requirement calls for a quick printf, but the implemented module is equivalent to ncurses. And then every…

Thanks. I do think I see the distinction you're making.

Re: AI doesn't generate working products, that's still your job

#198
post #24

The test is simple: have we seen great new products or improvements in the products we use over the past 12,24,36 months? The only great new product I’ve used is my LLM of choice, and those labs seem to be hiring more humans than ever. Maybe it’s true that Claude only just got good enough and that 12 months from now our day to day lives will be way better thanks to LLM-driven product improvements/breakthroughs. My be…

I am launching projects at about the same rate, but the projects are much more polished and feature full than before AI tools.

Historically, the mindset was to get happy path working launch and see what works, but now you can ship a much more polished products with things like cancellation and account export, private policies, a entire mobile and web app without much effort.

Re: AI doesn't generate working products, that's still your job

#199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

some of the problems ya'llk encountering would be solved with dumber and slower local models.

Some of the problems I solved after a few attempts where the llm couldn't solve the issue was by dumbing down the prompts.. ...

I've been successfully using local LLMs for the past few months on equipment ranging from AMD 395+ strix halo, to dual nvidia gpus with 96GB ampere, to 24GB dual 3060, etc. They all produce text gen at almost readable rates. You can read the thinking traces, the editting of code in the opencode harness, etc.

Along that same use, I've never touched any cloud service for code gen, and looked at docs or arena LLM. From my POV, it seems like a lot of people arn't even paying attention to the LLMs output when they generate their projects. So I don't find it hard to believe there's seemingly intelligent people being swindled by LLMs, big or small, because they do make bizarre assumptions and go into code edits that don't make sense even when they appeared to be running.

Then there's people that say they're in the ballpark of 500k context before they even get to work on something where these local models struggle when they get up to 100k both from generating and keeping scope on what they're doing. This is managed by opencode plugin dynamic-context-pruning that has the LLM rewrite sections of the context into summaries, while keeping the working context. It works pretty wel where a session then gets into ~500k where the working increments from 30k-80k of useful life.

So, I think we all underestimate how easily people can be swindled into poor development behaviors and _one_ reason, is the large cloud models just dump way more changes along a scope and can easily poison a whole chain of a feature or app implementation.

So the OP above who got 3 months into an app they think is hitting a dead end is recognizable as having one idea in their head of what's being built and the LLM building something subtly different because they're inevitably only reviewing the things that confirm the specs in their head and don't look for the edge cases that break it.

Re: AI doesn't generate working products, that's still your job

#200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Popped over to HackerNews, read two comment sections and the top comments in both articles were users saying the same thing: "AI can't write code! The whole thing will come crumbling down any minute! Just you wait!" I've never seen this community like this. Are these people cooked? We are years into this and they haven't been able to figure it out? They are going to continue to tell people using these tools successfu…

> Are these people cooked? Yes. This is a weird kind of denial about the LLMs that cost nation-state levels of energy doing human nerd work. They aren't perfect at all, but there's very little reason to be anything but a prompt engineer and proof reader anymore.

The naysayers aren't cooked at all. They have really, really good points that align with my own experience so perfectly It's eerie. Vine coding has a price tag attached that will have to be paid with interest eventually. The trouble is that it takes a whole damn lot of experience see these signs early.

That doesn't mean that LLM slop code can't be useful. But you just can't build a whole business entirely by surfing a wave of vibe coded slop. That wave will break over you and drown you eventually.

Post reply on HN