Andrew Ng: Building Faster with AI [video] • Hacker News Board

Re: Andrew Ng: Building Faster with AI [video]

#101

Post by blurbleblurble » Sun, Jul 13, 2025, 4:56 PM UTC

sensanaty wrote: post #94

dimal wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is completely bizarre. I’ve been wondering what’s happening to programmer interviews now that AI makes all the standard formats pointless. I never imagined that they would ADD coding to the process for other roles. Having PMs vibe coding in an interview? That’s idiotic.

We've recently come under new management, and the interview process for ICs has changed about a week ago and is similarly absurd to me. For the frontend role, we have candidates awkwardly read through an AI-generated document that is split up extremely awkwardly and in general has that AI tone to it which makes it hard to read through because it's extremely generic, non-specific and devoid of any useful details or in…

yikes

Re: Andrew Ng: Building Faster with AI [video]

#102

Post by anomalistically » Mon, Jul 14, 2025, 1:49 PM UTC

sensanaty wrote: post #94

dimal wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is completely bizarre. I’ve been wondering what’s happening to programmer interviews now that AI makes all the standard formats pointless. I never imagined that they would ADD coding to the process for other roles. Having PMs vibe coding in an interview? That’s idiotic.

We've recently come under new management, and the interview process for ICs has changed about a week ago and is similarly absurd to me. For the frontend role, we have candidates awkwardly read through an AI-generated document that is split up extremely awkwardly and in general has that AI tone to it which makes it hard to read through because it's extremely generic, non-specific and devoid of any useful details or in…

I have been reading content about AI from the 70s and 80s.

The same wishful thinking we see now was there already.

"AI" is the ultimate computer technology hype. It makes very intelligent people shift into magical thinking. And now having the first competent chatbot in history got people to believe in magic. Nevermind it corrupts your data half the times.

Re: Andrew Ng: Building Faster with AI [video]

#103

Post by mehulashah » Wed, Jul 16, 2025, 5:53 AM UTC

nextworddev wrote: post #81

mehulashah wrote: post #75

This talk is deceptively simple. The most sage advice that founders routinely forget is what concrete idea are you going to implement and why do you think it will work? There has be a way to invalidate your idea and as a corollary you must have the focus to collect the data and properly invalidate it.

Hey Mehul, crossed paths with you at AWS. Good to see you are doing your own thing now. We could connect sometime

Happy to. DM me.

Re: Andrew Ng: Building Faster with AI [video]

#104

Post by lloeki » Thu, Jul 17, 2025, 5:25 PM UTC

nivertech wrote: post #58

lloeki wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> AOP? (since aspect-oriented programming is history) AOP is very much alive, people that do AOP have just forgotten what the name is, and many have simply reinvented it poorly.

AOP always felt like a hack. I used it with C++ early on, and it was a preprocessor inserting ("weaving") aspects in the function entries/exits. Mostly was useful for logging. But that can be somewhat emulated using C++ constructors/destructors. Maybe it can be also useful for DbC (Design-by-Contract) when sets of functions/methods have common pre/post-conditions and/or invariants. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspec…

> AOP always felt like a hack. I used it with C++

Colour me surprised that a language which is the practical definition of bolted-on features has an implementation that feels like a bolted-on hack ;)

> early on

Also the "early" AOP was very much focused on a formal definition and a specific approach, further entrenched by how Java did it.

But you don't need to do AOP "by the letter" to do AOP: as long as you have cross-cutting concerns that you sprinkle over your code you're doing AOP, even if you're not calling that pointcut and stuff.

Python decorators, C# attributes, Ruby's whole "monkey patching" (e.g alias method chaining pattern, or simply modules combined with the ancestor system and message passing) are all pretty much variations that fit well with the AOP paradigm.

I'd argue that a lot of people are doing AOP without ever realising it.