Live data from Hacker News

Fuck it, make it anyway

joelotter.com

311–320 of 612 posts

Re: Fuck it, make it anyway

#311
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is eery to read, as I've been thinking something very similar recently whilst discussing gen AI with a close friend who works in tech but isn't a developer, who now uses AI to build everything he wished he could. Meanwhile I've seen other people, colleagues, friends, who are programmers get incredibly frustrated about AI and it's almost entirely that it lets non-developers make things. The feeling I get is that…

> The people who are happy about this change, are those who would answer a programmer's job is to produce value. This is sort of meaningless; the purpose of _every_ job is to produce value. The reason I chose to be a software engineer is because I enjoy solving the kinds of problems that it involved, not because it would allow me to deliver value to companies. Changing what a programmer does is _changing the job_, an…

Yea this whole “your job is to create value” argument is always really shaky. Add “with computers and stuff” to the end and it becomes more plausible. Nobody gets a degree is “providing value”.

Re: Fuck it, make it anyway

#312
post #19

In general creators must do some honest introspection. Did you enjoy the crafts, or did you enjoy the compliments? Did you enjoy the difficult puzzles or the identity derived from a career that gives you the reputation and perceived value of someone who can do a thing most people can’t? Did you enjoy the code itself or the accomplishment of seeing your ideas brought to life? Who remains when the thing you do no longe…

Someone once told me "Some people like writing books. Other people wish they had written a book." People who don't enjoy the craft are not bothered by AI and will replace manual labour with AI. There's nothing with that, but what I don't enjoy about this recent discussion is the assumption that anyone doing things by hand is wasting their time. "You're gonna be obsolete". But that was the reality before, with the str…

what craft though?

That is to say - I don't really love programming. I do it out of necessity. Before product managers got looked at as 'too much headcount in an org', I kind of think I would have liked that.

I like the outcomes. I like tools that I like to use. I like writing tools and software and systems that work for me.

I also like the outcomes for OTHER people. In my line of work, things working is really important - it costs money when things are not working - so I like building those systems that work but also have good tools to inspect when things go amiss or need to be changed.

I am like an engineer (I am not) who learned how to use R or Matlab - for the outcome not for the love of the game.

Another example may be cars. I am a competent mechanic. I have been employed as a mechanic. The reason I like cars is to drive them. At the end of the day every bolt that is stuck and every radiator I have to drop is excruciating and painful and I hate it, but the look on the customers face when they can get back in their car is priceless.

Re: Fuck it, make it anyway

#313
post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> AI music is not and cannot be inspirational. It's the absolute opposite of it. And serious musicians know it. So, your answer to "people are doing a thing" is to just say "no they're not! NANANANA can't hear you!" Musicians have claimed to take inspiration from things like water dripping from a leaky faucet and machine sounds, so your claim that AI outputs can't inspire artists is farcical. You're obviously biased…

> Musicians have claimed to take inspiration from things like water dripping from a leaky faucet and machine sounds I don't think you really understand how this very concept undermines your argument. If I saw an artist making creative non-AI work critiquing AI, or even using AI to pointedly critique AI, I would feel differently about that. But I don't think you understand the core concepts here at all. > You're obvio…

No wizardry involved friend, it's pretty clear to see from the way things are playing out now and the history of technological innovation/automation. You are 100% an old man waiving his fist at clouds/time, you will go down just like the scribes and the luddites and the buggy drivers and the portrait painters and the elevator operators. You can make arguments for preferring life before the change, but the change is happening and not accepting it is only self destructive.

Re: Fuck it, make it anyway

#314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

3 responses, all from green accounts basically hurling the same vitriol at you. Has someone gone and made 3 accounts to make it seem like their take is more popular?

Yes, and they’re being a bit too obvious about it.

Re: Fuck it, make it anyway

#315
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is eery to read, as I've been thinking something very similar recently whilst discussing gen AI with a close friend who works in tech but isn't a developer, who now uses AI to build everything he wished he could. Meanwhile I've seen other people, colleagues, friends, who are programmers get incredibly frustrated about AI and it's almost entirely that it lets non-developers make things. The feeling I get is that…

> The people who are happy about this change, are those who would answer a programmer's job is to produce value. This is sort of meaningless; the purpose of _every_ job is to produce value. The reason I chose to be a software engineer is because I enjoy solving the kinds of problems that it involved, not because it would allow me to deliver value to companies. Changing what a programmer does is _changing the job_, an…

Hm “Bullshit Jobs” terminology by David Graeber seems appropriate here.

Of course, “produce value” is slightly different from meaningful jobs that Bullshit Jobs was referring to.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullshit_Jobs

Re: Fuck it, make it anyway

#316
post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Musicians have claimed to take inspiration from things like water dripping from a leaky faucet and machine sounds I don't think you really understand how this very concept undermines your argument. If I saw an artist making creative non-AI work critiquing AI, or even using AI to pointedly critique AI, I would feel differently about that. But I don't think you understand the core concepts here at all. > You're obvio…

No wizardry involved friend, it's pretty clear to see from the way things are playing out now and the history of technological innovation/automation. You are 100% an old man waiving his fist at clouds/time, you will go down just like the scribes and the luddites and the buggy drivers and the portrait painters and the elevator operators. You can make arguments for preferring life before the change, but the change is h…

And you thought you could criticise me on bias? :-) This is little more than tropes fresh from the blender.

(If you read many of my other posts, you will perhaps see that I am a bit more pragmatically engaged with AI than you suggest.)

Re: Fuck it, make it anyway

#317
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone once told me "Some people like writing books. Other people wish they had written a book." People who don't enjoy the craft are not bothered by AI and will replace manual labour with AI. There's nothing with that, but what I don't enjoy about this recent discussion is the assumption that anyone doing things by hand is wasting their time. "You're gonna be obsolete". But that was the reality before, with the str…

I just see it as tool. Used to be you had to calculate things by hand on paper. Then we got calculators, then spreadsheets. Complaining that by hand was better seems line nonsense. I'm old enough to have taken typing lessons in high school on typewriters with real ink and needed to use white-out to fix things and if there are too many mistakes having to start over from scratch. I don't want to go back. Construction w…

This is a terrible example. Cars qualitatively opened up something that humans could never do before. Same with the computer. What about LLMs?

LLMs just replace what you were already doing, but don’t qualitatively open up all that much in the frontier. A million lines of LLM slop? Arguably LLMs close the frontier, rely too much on it and your ability to think hard and long ends up getting crushed.

Re: Fuck it, make it anyway

#318
post #72

In general creators must do some honest introspection. Did you enjoy the crafts, or did you enjoy the compliments? Did you enjoy the difficult puzzles or the identity derived from a career that gives you the reputation and perceived value of someone who can do a thing most people can’t? Did you enjoy the code itself or the accomplishment of seeing your ideas brought to life? Who remains when the thing you do no longe…

This is eery to read, as I've been thinking something very similar recently whilst discussing gen AI with a close friend who works in tech but isn't a developer, who now uses AI to build everything he wished he could. Meanwhile I've seen other people, colleagues, friends, who are programmers get incredibly frustrated about AI and it's almost entirely that it lets non-developers make things. The feeling I get is that…

> Meanwhile I've seen other people, colleagues, friends, who are programmers get incredibly frustrated about AI and it's almost entirely that it lets non-developers make things.

My frustration is a) people vastly overrate the LLM's ability to program (they really suck, but people act like they are actually good), and b) that delusion is likely to have a material impact on my ability to make a living, if not kill my career entirely. I don't care if non-programmers can make things, but I do care if the skill I spent my life developing becomes worthless overnight (as anyone would). And when the machine isn't even a competent replacement for me, that just adds insult to injury.

Re: Fuck it, make it anyway

#319
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone once told me "Some people like writing books. Other people wish they had written a book." People who don't enjoy the craft are not bothered by AI and will replace manual labour with AI. There's nothing with that, but what I don't enjoy about this recent discussion is the assumption that anyone doing things by hand is wasting their time. "You're gonna be obsolete". But that was the reality before, with the str…

what craft though? That is to say - I don't really love programming. I do it out of necessity. Before product managers got looked at as 'too much headcount in an org', I kind of think I would have liked that. I like the outcomes. I like tools that I like to use. I like writing tools and software and systems that work for me. I also like the outcomes for OTHER people. In my line of work, things working is really impor…

If you can't see craft in programming, then you're most certainly fully replaceable by LLMs. And I mean fully.

The "no, but you see, the important part is what I do!" replies get really tiresome after a while.

Re: Fuck it, make it anyway

#320
> surprise, it’s generative AI. The ongoing devaluation of the work of artists and makers

Who themselves can use AI to make even more radical art with far less effort, but refuse to do so because of some kind of... I don't know, a mental block? Perhaps we need better AI-accelerated artist tooling instead of one-shot garbage.

> Every programmer I know has basically gone insane over the last couple of years

Meanwhile, I feel more enabled than in my entire 35+ year career programming. But I also never got pushed into it, and don't have to deal with coworkers who use it badly because I'm solo currently. I do feel bad for people on teams for whom AI has caused much consternation.

> peer pressure is very real

Caving into peer pressure as a coder? Not something I have ever done, unfortunately. If you want to entirely reject AI assistance, then just own it and don't whine about it.

> even disregarding all the environmental

The environmental arguments are non-evidence-backed nonsense. Meanwhile, there's plenty of evidence that this whole idea comes from Chinese bot influence campaigns trying to politically polarize AI in the United States in order to slow us down so that they can surge ahead and economically win. And unfortunately, it's working. Case in point.

> It isn’t fun for me

I STILL don't understand this POV. Prior to AI, I had a massive backlog of ideas that I simply did not have the time or energy to work on. I now can, and have now built out a lot of those ideas (see my github). I'm chewing through that backlog like a chainsaw. Is all of the produced code perfect? No. Do I insist on lots more tests and controls to ensure it is as close to that as controls can get it? Yes. Has it yet to produce unfixable bugs? No.

> I use my interactive git branch switcher every single day

I love making those little tools too! And now I can make 10 of them in the time it used to take me to make 1 of them myself! Your tool is a neat idea! You still own that idea! And I can also rewrite it in Rust or Zig now with AI since I hate Go, and I don't think that's a bad thing!

> I’ve spent years learning how to make games, and it’s been hard, and now it feels like that might have been a waste of time

Your understanding and experience is not going away. In fact, it's needed to steer your AI accelerator.

> It also happens to be developed entirely without generative AI

That is a conscious choice made flying in the face of the evidence that it could have been built a lot faster with AI assistance and YOUR guidance. What's wrong with delivery speed, again?

> there are only really three paths open to me

This is a fallacy. Let's call it the false trichotomy fallacy. You have already resigned yourself to be unhappy about this since none of your options include "joy", so your brain automatically gathers evidence to support that belief... and you need to realize this, because it is dangerous. You now literally won't be able to perceive evidence TO ACTUALLY be happy about it- I call this "epistemic blindness", or we could just call it "doom framing". The key thing to understand is that you control the framing by choosing it, and that your chosen framings automatically and artificially limit your perceived options.

I can prove this to you- Think back to the first time you encountered AI work assistance. Was your feeling good, or bad? Has it ever switched? I'm going to guess that it started early and never switched. Why is that? Because you (or your brain, via its confirmation-bias-seeking) immediately decided to remember evidence supporting your initial feeling, and forget or ignore evidence against it!

But yes. If you must completely ignore AI to keep your sanity based on your own self-limited set of possible options (none of which result in happiness), then please, just go ahead and do so and just own it. Just don't whine about it, because that attitude (victimization via false self-perceived lack of agency and putting all blame on externalities) is toxic.

Post reply on HN