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

Domain expertise has always been the real moat

brethorsting.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 592 posts

Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat

#131

Post by consumer451 »

skeptic_ai wrote: post #111
consumer451 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I used billions of tokens last month alone. I use Claude Code (Opus 4.6 at max effort) all day long, and I genuinely don't understand how this is possible. Is that usage paying off? This is very likely due to my lack of understanding, but... how?

Don’t forget context. Basically I have 2 billion input and 1 million output. Every prompt you do, sends back the whole thing again and again. Let’s say you have 500k context used, you send 10 messages is 5 million. 100 messages 50 million. Use 5 threats is 250 million.

But how is it even possible (bad harness?), or wise, to send 500k or 1M tokens per call? Regarding cache, how are you not hitting the 1hr cache? Also, start new chats early and often!

I have been "agentic coding" since Sonnet 3.5 and after this paper came out, it became my bible:

https://github.com/adobe-research/NoLiMa

Last I checked, all models suck as you fill the context window. "Context engineering" is how you do this whole thing.

Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat

#132

Post by vector_spaces »

awesome_dude wrote: post #112
toastmaster11 wrote: post #62

How much pontificating needs to be done before people acknowledge nobody has any idea what to do with AI on an individual level? First being good developer and learning how to use AI was sufficient, next it was being able to design architecture, then it was “taste” that made all the difference and now being an expert in the domain is the only thing that matters really. Until AI is basically in a stable, predictable,…

So far AI has been a (genuinely) massive improvement for... Search It's reading my requests more clearly than (for example) Google's search input ever did, and it's got (some) understanding of how close the result (or fragments of results) are to what I want. I can ask it about things I know about, and it can answer with strategies I hadn't thought of. HOWEVER - I still need to understand the results AND AI can overr…

> It's reading my requests more clearly than (for example) Google's search input ever did

I see this take a lot and it puzzles me.

While I think LLMs provide some advantages over traditional search in some modestly nontrivial contexts, they tend to be inferior to traditional search at its peak. I attribute this attitude to two things: the broad progressive enshittification and productization of search, and the fact that (re)search is a skill that most people tend to be bad at. Without massaging, LLMs spit out the most utterly braindead boneheaded queries, which are fine in cases where the problem is very well understood with minimum uncertainty or critical nuance. If your problem has either, God help you. But perhaps those queries are at least as good as the average human generated query

Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat

#133

Post by faangguyindia »

toastmaster11 wrote: post #62

How much pontificating needs to be done before people acknowledge nobody has any idea what to do with AI on an individual level? First being good developer and learning how to use AI was sufficient, next it was being able to design architecture, then it was “taste” that made all the difference and now being an expert in the domain is the only thing that matters really. Until AI is basically in a stable, predictable,…

It all feels to me similar to how spectators or laypeople judge pro sports.

Don’t quote me on this, just trying to make a point:

They’ll say you need perfect symmetry to do well in sports, which is highly correlated to development stability in the womb; higher symmetry = perfect development.

Then after some years, news will come: Bruce Lee’s one leg is shorter than the other by a significant amount, and Usain Bolt has a similar asymmetrical development.

Then they’ll flip-flop around their initial argument by claiming that they are outliers so the general rule need not apply.

brother just build what you find interesting and it may work :)

Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat

#135

Post by QuantumFunnel »

not_kurt_godel wrote: post #101
toastmaster11 wrote: post #62

How much pontificating needs to be done before people acknowledge nobody has any idea what to do with AI on an individual level? First being good developer and learning how to use AI was sufficient, next it was being able to design architecture, then it was “taste” that made all the difference and now being an expert in the domain is the only thing that matters really. Until AI is basically in a stable, predictable,…

I write software that makes money and AI helps me write software that makes more money.

[flagged]

Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat

#136

Post by mordae »

> There’s no skill file that contains the tacit knowledge of a person who has reconciled a thousand payrolls.

That person has zero skill in actually making tight automation that doesn't just fall over. And I have yet to see an AI agent that tells them "look, your requirements are contradictory, given this and that, these two cannot coexist".

Those little sycophants will just go and try to please the domain expert and placate him in all ways possible. Bend backwards rather then forcing them to reassess their assumptions.

Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat

#137

Post by matchagaucho »

toastmaster11 wrote: post #62

How much pontificating needs to be done before people acknowledge nobody has any idea what to do with AI on an individual level? First being good developer and learning how to use AI was sufficient, next it was being able to design architecture, then it was “taste” that made all the difference and now being an expert in the domain is the only thing that matters really. Until AI is basically in a stable, predictable,…

I'd like to believe that stable state ends in a pair-programming structure, with a systems thinker/engineer and a domain expert.

Someone needs to spot when a linked list is better than a map. And the other needs to spot when clinical trial coding should happen before claims, audits, or patient outreach.

Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat

#139

Post by awesome_dude »

vector_spaces wrote: post #132
awesome_dude wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So far AI has been a (genuinely) massive improvement for... Search It's reading my requests more clearly than (for example) Google's search input ever did, and it's got (some) understanding of how close the result (or fragments of results) are to what I want. I can ask it about things I know about, and it can answer with strategies I hadn't thought of. HOWEVER - I still need to understand the results AND AI can overr…

> It's reading my requests more clearly than (for example) Google's search input ever did I see this take a lot and it puzzles me. While I think LLMs provide some advantages over traditional search in some modestly nontrivial contexts, they tend to be inferior to traditional search at its peak. I attribute this attitude to two things: the broad progressive enshittification and productization of search, and the fact t…

I think that the issue here is that the definition of search/results has changed (in my mind at least they were always - what knowledge are you looking for, followed by, here are the results that carry that knowledge OR point in the right direction, but I recognise that other people will hold more strict definitions)

AI has changed how I find and synthesise information in ways Google never managed - we've always had the problem with Google that we couldn't express exactly what we were looking for - that much I think we can both agree has changed dramatically for the better with LLMs

Edit: I have always held that searching for an answer (whether it be internet or human) has always been about asking the right person, the right question, at the right time.

LLMs most certainly improve that - I don't need to know the exact technical term I am looking to solve in order to get the results I want (eg. I can ask how to "stop (a) function from running too many times" instead of the industry terms "throttling" or "debouncing")

Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat

#140

Post by bayarearefugee »

aaronbrethorst wrote: post #8
threethirtytwo wrote: post #7

“The hard part of writing software has never been the writing.” I’m tired of these endless articles on HN about software engineers trying to reinvent their identity while trying not to lose touch with reality. One way of dealing with LLMs is to deny the skill level of LLMs. Claim they can’t code as well as you. This excuse works to a certain extent but it also fails because not only are their multitudes of cases wher…

Have you considered becoming a residential electrician? Good job, pays well, lots of problem solving, and it won’t be replaced with an AI. I’m serious!

If a real AI job apocalypse hits there will be no escaping it for anyone.

Even people whose job can't be done by AI will be impacted because there will be far less demand for their services (everyone whose job IS directly AI replaceable will be a brokie) and there will also be far more supply of people moving into their field to escape all the jobs AI does directly replace.

"Join the trades" is the new "learn to code" in terms of seeming like good advice but having a very short shelf life.

Post reply on HN