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

Don't be the out of touch Kung Fu master

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 427 posts

Re: Don't be the out of touch Kung Fu master

#381

Post by threethirtytwo »

sublinear wrote: post #64
threethirtytwo wrote: post #48

HN is loaded with out of touch Kung Fu masters. They were the loudest skeptics against AI. Still a lot here. It's human nature. If your identity is defined by your kung fu and a technology is about to obsolesce your kung fu, then all logic goes out the window as you go all out in protecting your identity. It's mostly for themselves. They have to lie to themselves and tell themselves that they still "matter".

It's funny that we almost agree except you have it 100% backwards. The out of touch kung fu masters are all retired or close to it. They continue to shout about their big bet on AI as loudly as possible to protect their egos and, as a last ditch effort, whatever money they threw in. After all, everyone who is mid-career and younger cannot possibly be a master of anything. Of course they're using AI at work, but that…

I never commented on age. So we are actually in perfect agreement. Yes, older people tend to have their identities and expertises ingrained. They have more to lose in terms of identity.

Re: Don't be the out of touch Kung Fu master

#382

Post by jasonvorhe »

sriram_malhar wrote: post #31

Everyone who writes enthusiastically about AI already has the benefit of having worked without AI. They have been schooled in the basics. Enough of us know about data structures, concurrency, networks, language design etc. from the ground up that the knowledge is passed on. I worry about the world that we will be living in when a whole generation has skipped learning the basics the hard way. Given the attendance rate…

I think this has long been the norm without AI. Just look at a lot of politians cheating with their university tests, outsourcing the work that lands them their titles to low earning ghost writers. Why do you think so many incompetent people rise to powerful managerial positions to make terrible decisions without consequences. It's probably going on for much longer than we all think because it's not always easy to find hard evidence and we're all trained to treat circumstantial evidence. How many scandals were there of influential people buying their kids into elite colleges? AI is just accelerating what's been ongoing already.

Re: Don't be the out of touch Kung Fu master

#383

Post by ElProlactin »

dofm wrote: post #248
ElProlactin wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I only have the nagging question that if it’s so easy, why would the clients not do it by themselves? Plenty of reasons, including: 1. They don't (yet) know how to use AI to accomplish what they need. 2. The ROI is still meaningfully positive and they don't want to have to do it themselves. 3. Having a third-party do the work provides protection for decision-makers. If the project fails, the third-party takes the b…

Yes but it's cheaper? Of course they will do it by themselves. Because it's cheaper. I mean it's weird that we all imagine reasons why we're still relevant when we have set fire to the thing that made us indispensable. It's cheaper.

> I mean it's weird that we all imagine reasons why we're still relevant when we have set fire to the thing that made us indispensable.

Very few things in this world are all-or-nothing, and not every purchasing decision is based on price alone.

Do you always buy the cheapest meal? Car? When you renovate your house, do you always choose the cheapest contractor?

Tons of developers will lose their jobs, and many more will find it hard to maintain the salaries/rates the industry has been accustomed to. This is already happening. The days where an average graduate from a run-of-the-mill CompSci program or even a coding bootcamp could sleepwalk into a $150,000+/year entry-level job are largely gone. The days where you have job security simply because you're a competent developer with 10 years of experience are in the process of going away.

This does not mean that there is no subset of developers who cannot be successful in this market. There are people who are doing just fine because they know how to articulate their value and sell themselves to employers or clients.

Re: Don't be the out of touch Kung Fu master

#384

Post by duxup »

glimshe wrote: post #3

We are going from the era of manual, line-by-line mental model transcription to one where software engineers can focus on data structures, software architecture and algorithms. I love being able to quickly bring out the program that is already running in my head without having to worry about the grind of typing it into a format that the compiler understands. Dealing with API names. Syntax. Language quirks. Library go…

I think I feel similarly to you.

M currently re-writing an app that I wrote years ago. All the issues came from data structures, queries, architecture that didn’t fit what emerged as the use case.

Now I can focus on those things and work far faster, and even ADJUST architecture, theorize about pros and cons of changes as I work … sometimes I find that some adjustments are easier than I thought.

The result is far faster development, and a more optimal result where I can stay focused on improvements / efficiency rather than random minutia.

Re: Don't be the out of touch Kung Fu master

#385

Post by SideQuark »

eesmith wrote: post #107
boshalfoshal wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Code in most organizations is a means to an end to produce an actual product. The job of a SWE is to not produce the most sublime readable code with cute language bells and whistles that you can show off to your other programmer friends. Yes its fun to do and interesting, but the main value in writing code is to express your intent so you and other people that are working with you can actually build something of valu…

Products in most organizations are an end to making profit. The job value of an SWE is to maximize that profit. It doesn't matter if the product is better to use, faster, with more features users like - that's an early 20th century model of value production. What matters is how much money the company can extract from its customers, and how little it can pay its employees. Use dark patterns, increase lock-in, and swit…

> The Luddites were not opposed to machines.

In the sense they were not opposed to all machines as a concept. They were definitely against machines they thought reduced their labor value:

"They wrecked specific types of machinery that posed a threat to the particular industrial interests in each region. In the Midlands, these were the "wide" knitting frames used to make cheap and inferior lace articles.[22] In the North West, weavers sought to eliminate the steam-powered looms threatening wages in the cotton trade. In Yorkshire, workers opposed the use of shearing frames and gig mills to finish woollen cloth.[23]"

Citations in

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

Re: Don't be the out of touch Kung Fu master

#386

Post by usef- »

tripzilch wrote: post #371

> The retro computing scene is delightful that was truly, deeply, unnecessarily condescending of him. it's so full of self-importance, even if he truly believes that whatever code he's writing is more important than anything else, it's really an unnecessary dig especially coming from some guy who by many people is mostly known for his accomplishments in an era that many people would call retro computing now sure I kn…

You're reading something into that line that I don't see. I read it as sincere.

Re: Don't be the out of touch Kung Fu master

#387

Post by usef- »

tkel wrote: post #29

Ironically, this post comes off as out of touch. The purpose of the various martial arts isn't just to win in a life-or-death brawl or murder people as efficiently as possible. Similarly, the point of programming isn't just to generate as much code as possible, or only to be more "productive".

When photography came out, artists redefined their purpose as not being about realism.

Similar has already happened with martial arts, as OP mentions, and you've grown up with the new definition/focus not the original one.

Re: Don't be the out of touch Kung Fu master

#388

Post by vouaobrasil »

lowbloodsugar wrote: post #328
SoftTalker wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm exactly the opposite. I like knowing how the code works, what the data structures are, what APIs are being used, and yes even typing the code into the editor. When I'm working with LLMs there's less thinking. I'm bored. My brain is not fully engaged in the task. There's less sense of accomplishment in the finished product. I also prefer to drive cars with manual transmissions.

Yes. You are the Kung Fu master in Carmack’s analogy.

Not necessarily a bad thing. Just because Carmack has an optimistic view and has some catchet in the programming world doesn't mean he's any more correct than a raving lunatic. Frankly, he said relatively little of substance and it's only made more irrelevant because he's said it from a priveleged position.

Re: Don't be the out of touch Kung Fu master

#389

Post by vouaobrasil »

glimshe wrote: post #3

We are going from the era of manual, line-by-line mental model transcription to one where software engineers can focus on data structures, software architecture and algorithms. I love being able to quickly bring out the program that is already running in my head without having to worry about the grind of typing it into a format that the compiler understands. Dealing with API names. Syntax. Language quirks. Library go…

There will always be people who will like it because they are the ones getting ahead and get some reward. If a person is rewarded for something, it's unlikely that they'll care how the reward comes or be critical of the mechanism. It's just human nature; AI has incredible downsides but those who get ahead won't mind, as long as they get ahead.

I bet thieves feel a rush when they rob a store. Does that also make it right?

Re: Don't be the out of touch Kung Fu master

#390

Post by evolve-maz »

GMoromisato wrote: post #306
evolve-maz wrote: post #83

It's interesting to see how over the span of just a few years a lot of people went from: > Architecture astronauts are out of touch and shouldn't give any advice because they haven't written code in ages. Only the hands on engineers can shape it since the design evolves in step with writing the code. To > I focus on the architecture patterns and high level goals and let the LLM take care of the rest. Similar commenta…

I'm one of (if not the) original architecture astronaut, so you may not want to listen to me, but you're sliding from "architecture astronauts are bad" (true) to "architecture doesn't matter" (false). Arguably, architecture is the only thing that ever mattered. Below the level of architecture you're dealing either with algorithms or API calls. Algorithms can be validated by tests and API calls can be validated by tes…

I agree architecture is important. But I think the best way to design a good architecture is to have a high level plan, and then feel it out by coding parts of it (usually near component edges / interfaces) in the actual domain with real use cases.

That exploration helped me see whether general "best practices" are applicable in this frame, and let me justify if not.

That was also prevailing opinion pre LLM:

> Only the hands on engineers can shape it since the design evolves in step with writing the code.

So I'm curious to know where people changed their minds.

Post reply on HN