191–200 of 318 posts
Dupe: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44284291 (117 points | 8 days ago | 28 comments) Seems like the link changed, and thus not caught by the dupe detector.
An anecdote about how a toy project _really_ helped me out: I work on Dart professionally. I've also been tinkering on a toy programming language that may never see the light of day. My toy language has gone through several incarnations but a while back I was working on adding algebraic datatypes, pattern matching, and exhaustiveness checking to it. The canonical algorithm for exhaustiveness checking is this paper by…
I love the article but disagree with the final point. It wasn't until LLMs came out that my toy projects have all been greatly upgraded with features and functionality. I simply didn't have time to do so before.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How are you supposed to learn to invent new things if you don't know how existing things work?
There's ZERO room for innovation in the projects suggested. Wanna do some creative thinking? Read some books, learn how normal people think. Explore latest datasets. That's where the meat is. 98% of what you read online has been written by super uncreative(boring) people. They have no imagination whatsoever, IQ is well statistically speaking not too flattering. Internet is ran by the bottom. It's slop by the bottom,…
Reinventing existing software has 0 merit. If you cannot be creative enough to invent new things, you shouldn't bother working.
I'm surprised by the number of bad takes on LLMs in this thread. LLMs spoon-feed you with information about how things are implemented. You are not supposed to know how everything works when you start these projects. You're supposed to try your best, inevitably fail, then research the topic and understand where you went wrong, then adjust your approach. If you know how everything works and just follow the tutorial, y…
A lot of people say if you don’t use LLMs then you will fall behind. I’m starting to think that not using them will be a significant advantage in the long run.
I've been wondering lately about how to distinguish between tools that enhance your cognitive ability, and tools that degrade it. Jobs called a computer a "bicycle for the mind," and it seems like LLMs are an easy-chair for the mind. I'm not sure a priori how to distinguish between the two classes of tools though. Maybe there is no other tool like an LLM.
> In 2025, the beauty and craft of writing software is being eroded. AI is threatening to replace us (or, at least, the most joyful aspects of our craft) and software development is being increasingly commodified, measured, packaged, and industrialised. Software development needs more simple joy, and I’ve found that creating toy programs is a great way to remember why I started working with computers again. Sad but t…
I have more joy than ever working on toy software while using LLMs. My joy comes from building things, thinking architecture, components, creative solutions that create something new and exciting. Hand-setting lines of code is NOT what brings me joy personally, it's a means to an end. Dancing with agentic LLMs is so much fun to me. I can however understand that if the code part is what brings you joy, then we're prob…
I understand the draw and usefulness of this, but just clarifying, it's not the typing that matters, it's what is going on (or not going on) in one's mind.
One of the best things that I’ve done for myself, career-wise, came during a 6-month sabbatical between jobs. I had a bunch of projects that I wanted to do, but I kept finding myself stymied by scope creep - when you don’t have any constraints, it’s hard to decide how big a project should be, and the projects would grow to these massive unfinishable beasts. I decided to constrain myself to one week per project - what…
I would just add that gen AI can actually be a fantastic aid when you're building some toy projects just for yourself. I am primarily a backend engineer, though I am capable on the front end, just not particularly fast. I am especially slow at the voodoo that is CSS. In the past, I would have been turned off from doing some end-to-end personal projects because I know I would have been bogged down just battling CSS fo…
I'm surprised by the number of bad takes on LLMs in this thread. LLMs spoon-feed you with information about how things are implemented. You are not supposed to know how everything works when you start these projects. You're supposed to try your best, inevitably fail, then research the topic and understand where you went wrong, then adjust your approach. If you know how everything works and just follow the tutorial, y…
A lot of people say if you don’t use LLMs then you will fall behind. I’m starting to think that not using them will be a significant advantage in the long run.
I guess the counterargument here would be that LLMs could improve research as well by optimizing menial tasks. It's kind of similar to how computing has enabled brute-force proofs in math. But I think the fact that students are still required to prove theorems on paper and that problems with brute-force solutions are still studied analytically should show that tools like computers or LLMs are not at all a replacement for the typical research process.