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

Snorting the AGI with Claude Code

kadekillary.work

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 253 posts

Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code

#181

Post by bryanrasmussen »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #178
baq wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UML was a buzzword, but a sequence diagram can sometimes replace a few hundred words of dry text. People think best in 2d.

>People think best in 2d. no they don't. some people do. Some people think best in sentences, paragraphs, and sections of structured text. Diagrams mean next to nothing to me. Some graphs, as in representations of actual mathematical graphs, do have meaning though. If a graph is really the best data structure to describe a particular problem space. on edit: added in "representations of" as I worried people might misu…

oops, evidently I got downvoted because I don't think best in 2d and that is bad, classy as always HN.

Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code

#182

Post by _1tem »

jumski wrote: post #158

Great article! I have similar observations and techniques and Claude Code is exceptionally good - most of the days I'm working on multiple things at once (thanks to git worktrees) and each going faster than ever - that's really crazy. For the "sub agents"thing, I must admit, that Claude Code calling o3 via sigoden/aichat saved me countless of times! There are just issues that o3 excells at (race conditions, bug hunti…

wait what? how do you work on multiple things at once with git worktrees?

Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code

#183

Post by therein »

ericrallen wrote: post #146
djeastm wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Will people be willing to make their full time job writing tests?

We’ll just have an LLM write the tests. Now we can work on our passion projects and everything will just be LLMs talking to LLMs.

I hope sarcasm.

Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code

#184

Post by TeMPOraL »

JohnMakin wrote: post #134
WD-42 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I felt the same thing about the onboarding. Like what future are we trying to build for ourselves here, exactly? The kind where instead of sitting down with a coworker to learn about a codebase, instead we get an ai generated PowerPoint to read alone???? Im so over this timeline.

all of this just reads like the supposed UML zeitgeist that was supposed to transform java and eliminate development 20 years ago if this is all ultimately java but with even more steps, its a sign im definitely getting old. it’s just the same pattern of non technical people deceiving themselves into believing they dont need to be technical to build tech and then ultimately resulting in again 10-20 years of re-learni…

The mistake was going after programmers, instead of going after programming languages, where the actual problem is.

UML may be ugly and in need of streamlining, but the idea of building software by creating and manipulating artifacts at the same conceptual level we are thinking at any given moment, is sound. Alas, we've long ago hit a wall in how much cross-cutting complexity we can stuff into the same piece of plaintext code, and we've been painfully scraping along the Pareto frontier ever since, vacillating between large and small functions and wasting time debating merits of sum types in lieu of exception handling, hoping that if we throw more CS PhDs into category theory blender, they'll eventually come up with some heavy duty super-mapping super monad that'll save us all.

(I wrote a lot on it in in the past here; c.f. "pareto frontier" and "plaintext single source of truth codebase".)

Unfortunately, it may be too late to fix it properly. Yes, LLMs are getting good enough to just translate between different perspectives/concerns on the fly, and doing the dirty work on the raw codebase for us. But they're also getting good enough that managers and non-technical people may finally get what they always wanted: building tech without being technical. For the first time ever, that goal is absolutely becoming realistic, and already possible in the small - that's what the whole "vibe coding" thing heralds.

Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code

#185

Post by TeMPOraL »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #178
baq wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UML was a buzzword, but a sequence diagram can sometimes replace a few hundred words of dry text. People think best in 2d.

>People think best in 2d. no they don't. some people do. Some people think best in sentences, paragraphs, and sections of structured text. Diagrams mean next to nothing to me. Some graphs, as in representations of actual mathematical graphs, do have meaning though. If a graph is really the best data structure to describe a particular problem space. on edit: added in "representations of" as I worried people might misu…

FWIW, you're likely right here; not everyone is a visual thinker.

Still, what both you and GP should be able to agree on, is that code - not pseudocode, simplified code, draft code, but actual code of a program - is one of the worst possible representations to be thinking and working in.

It's dumb that we're still stuck with this paradigm; it's a great lead anchor chained to our ankles, preventing us from being able to handle complexity better.

Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code

#186

Post by TeMPOraL »

mjrbrennan wrote: post #152
WD-42 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I felt the same thing about the onboarding. Like what future are we trying to build for ourselves here, exactly? The kind where instead of sitting down with a coworker to learn about a codebase, instead we get an ai generated PowerPoint to read alone???? Im so over this timeline.

Yes that's what gets me too. I want to engage with my coworkers, you know other humans? And get their ideas and input and summaries. Not just sit in my office alone having the computer explain everything to me badly, or read through Powerpoints of all things...

> I want to engage with my coworkers, you know other humans?

I.e. the very species we try to limit our contact with, which is why we chose this particular field of work? Or are you from the generation that joined software for easy money? :).

/s, but only partially.

There are aspects of this work where to "engage with my coworkers" is to be doing the exact opposite of productive work.

Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code

#187

Post by bryanrasmussen »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #185
bryanrasmussen wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>People think best in 2d. no they don't. some people do. Some people think best in sentences, paragraphs, and sections of structured text. Diagrams mean next to nothing to me. Some graphs, as in representations of actual mathematical graphs, do have meaning though. If a graph is really the best data structure to describe a particular problem space. on edit: added in "representations of" as I worried people might misu…

FWIW, you're likely right here; not everyone is a visual thinker. Still, what both you and GP should be able to agree on, is that code - not pseudocode, simplified code, draft code, but actual code of a program - is one of the worst possible representations to be thinking and working in. It's dumb that we're still stuck with this paradigm; it's a great lead anchor chained to our ankles, preventing us from being able…

ok, but my reference to sentences, paragraphs and sections would not indicate code but rather documentation.

Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code

#188

Post by KronisLV »

quietbritishjim wrote: post #180
Agentlien wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of all the things I read at uni UML is the thing I've felt the least use for - even when designing new systems. I've had more use for things I never thought I'd need like Rayleigh scattering and processor design.

I think most software engineers need to draw a class diagram from time to time. Maybe there are a lot of unnecessary details to the UML spec, but it certainly doesn't hurt to agree that a hollow triangle for the arrow head means parent/child while a normal arrow head means composition, with a diamond at the root for ownership. As the sibling comment says, sequence diagrams are often useful too. I've used them a few t…

> I think most software engineers need to draw a class diagram from time to time.

Sounds a lot like RegEx to me: if you use something often then obviously learn it but if you need it maybe a dozen or two dozen times per year, then perhaps there’s less need to do a deep dive outside of personal interest.

Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code

#189

Post by rkangel »

handfuloflight wrote: post #92
rbren wrote: post #89

I’m biased [0], but I think we should be scripting around LLM-agnostic open source agents. This technology is changing software development at its foundations—-we need to ensure we continue to control how we work. [0] https://github.com/all-hands-ai/openhands

But what do we do if the closed models are just better?

The agents are separate from the models. Claude Code only allows you to use Claude, but Aider allows you to use any model.

Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code

#190

Post by xandrius »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #175
mjrbrennan wrote: post #99

Not trying to be rude here, but that `last_week.md` is horrible to me. I can't imagine having to read that let alone listen to the computer say it to me. It's so much blah blah and fluff that reads like a bad PR piece. I'd much rather scan through commits of the last week. I've found this generally with AI summaries...usually their writing style is terrible, and I feel like I cannot really trust them to get the facts…

If this was meant to be read, I might've agreed, but: 1) This was supposed to be piped through TTS and listened to in the background, and... 2) People like podcasts . Your typical podcast is much worse than this. It's "blah blah" and "hahaha " and "ooh " and " " and " ", and maybe some of the actual topic mixed in between, and yet for some reason, people love it . I honestly doubt this specific thing would be useful…

What kind of podcast have you listened to, if any?

They aren't all Joe Rogan.

Post reply on HN