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

Using LLMs at Oxide

rfd.shared.oxide.computer

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 284 posts

Re: Using LLMs at Oxide

#131

Post by supriyo-biswas »

pram wrote: post #112
BobbyTables2 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MS FrontPage also went out of its way to do the same.

It’s funny this came up, because it was kinda similar to the whole “AI frauds” thing these days. I don’t particularly remember why, but “hand writing” fancy HTML and CSS used to be a flex in some circles in the 90s. A bunch of junk and stuff like fixed positioning in the source was the telltale sign they “cheated” with FrontPage or Dreamweaver lol

My only gripe was that they tended to generate gobs of “unsemantic” HTML. You resized a table and expect it to be based on viewport width? No! It’s hardcoded “width: X px” to whatever your size the viewport was set to.

Re: Using LLMs at Oxide

#132

Post by mulmboy »

girvo wrote: post #57
minimaxir wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have been testing agentic coding with Claude 4.5 Opus and the problem is that it's too good at documentation and test cases. It's thorough in a way that it goes out of scope, so I have to edit it down to increase the signal-to-noise.

The “change capture”/straight jacket style tests LLMs like to output drive me nuts. But humans write those all the time too so I shouldn’t be that surprised either!

What do these look like?

Re: Using LLMs at Oxide

#133

Post by sysguest »

christophilus wrote: post #86
zx8080 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but I swear it built the comprehension I have today. For interns/junior engineers, the choice is: comprehension VS career. And I won't be surprised if most of them will go with career now, and comprehension.. well thanks maybe tomorrow (or never).

I don’t think that’s the dichotomy. I’ve been in charge of hiring at a few companies, and comprehension is what I look for 10 times out of 10.

well you could get "interview-optimized" interviewees with impressive-looking mini-projects

Re: Using LLMs at Oxide

#135

Post by intended »

keyle wrote: post #52
sifar wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not clear though, which tools enable and which tools inhibit your development at the beginning of your journey.

Agreed, although LLMs definitely qualify as enabling developers compared to of today. The Internet itself is full of distractions. My younger self spent a crazy amount of time on IRC. So it's not different than spending time on say, Discord today. LLMs have pretty much a direct relationship with Google. The quality of the response has much to do with the quality of the prompt. If anything, it's the overwhelming natur…

LLMs are in a context where they are the promised solution for most of the expected economic growth on one end, a tool to improve programmer productivity and skill while also being only better than doom scrolling?

Thats comparison undermines the integrity of the argument you are trying to make.

Re: Using LLMs at Oxide

#136

Post by felipeerias »

StarterPro wrote: post #59

Nobody has yet to explain how an LLM can be better than a well paid human expert.

Tools can make individuals and teams more effective. This is just as true for LLM-based tools as it was for traditional ones.

The question is not whether one (1) LLM can replace one (1) expert.

Rather, it is how much farther an expert can get through better tooling. In my experience, it can be pretty far indeed.

Re: Using LLMs at Oxide

#137

Post by Simplita »

Oxide’s approach is interesting because it treats LLMs as a tool inside a much stricter engineering boundary. Makes me wonder how many teams would avoid chaos if they adopted the same discipline.

Re: Using LLMs at Oxide

#139

Post by darkwater »

aprilthird2021 wrote: post #73
keyle wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That junior engineer possibly hasn't programmed without the tantalizing, even desperately tempting option to be assisted by an LLM. This gives me somewhat of a knee jerk reaction. When I started programming professionally in the 90s, the internet came of age and I remember being told "in my days, we had books and we remembered things" which of course is hilarious because today you can't possibly retain ALL the know…

> When I started programming professionally in the 90s, the internet came of age and I remember being told "in my days, we had books and we remembered things" which of course is hilarious because today you can't possibly retain ALL the knowledge needed to be software engineer due to the sheer size of knowledge required today to produce a meaningful product. It's too big and it moves too fast. But I mean, you can get…

I'm sure I'm biased by my age (mid 40s) but I think you are onto something there. What if this constant decline in how people learn (on average) is not just a grumpy old man feeling? What if it's something real, that was smoothened out by the sheer increase of the student population between 1960 and 2010 and the improvements of tooling?

Re: Using LLMs at Oxide

#140

Post by torben-friis »

fastball wrote: post #122
torben-friis wrote: post #33

The guide is generally very well thought, but I see an issue in this part: It sets the rule that things must be actually read when there’s a social expectation (code interviews for example) but otherwise… remarks that use of LLMs to assist comprehension has little downside. I find two problems with this: - there is incoherence there. If LLMs are flawless in reading and summarization, there is no difference with readi…

> It sets the rule that things must be actually read when there’s a social expectation (code interviews for example) but otherwise… remarks that use of LLMs to assist comprehension has little downside. I think you got this backwards, because I don't think the RFD said that at all. The point was about a social expectation for writing, not for reading.

This is what I’m referencing:

>using LLMs to assist comprehension should not substitute for actually reading a document where such reading is socially expected.

Post reply on HN