Live data from Hacker News

Not everyone is using AI for everything

gabrielweinberg.com

211–220 of 565 posts

Re: Not everyone is using AI for everything

#211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume it's because he is seeking to pay rent, food bills, and other expenses through employment.

It's possible to work for an employer, and not have to compromise your values and or professional integrity. The attitude suggested by your response suggests you haven't lived that reality yet. Either way, I'd rather be rejected by an employer for speaking my truth, than lie to be somewhere I'd rather not be.

[deleted]

Re: Not everyone is using AI for everything

#212
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's tough to answer because you want to hedge for both an AI enthused employer and an AI hesitant employer with limited information about who they are and how they personally use these products. Have you considered just answering truthfully? Would you even want to work somewhere where you need to play a role and where they flip out when you say the wrong word you should've correctly guessed through mind reading? T…

Would being truthful improve my chances of being hired?

Yes. Hedging results in a middle-of-the-road answer that, at best, comes across as lukewarm. Companies want to hire people they're excited about and are convinced fit into their culture. An honest answer will get you more strong noes but also more strong yeses, and strong yeses turn into offers. Hedging, produces only weak yeses and noes, which tend to end in no offers especially in tighter job markets like the one we're in.

Re: Not everyone is using AI for everything

#213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Making systems fully deterministic ignores the entire purpose of having agents involved. IMHO the best of both worlds option is agents working with deterministic CLIs. Where the agent does the reasoning (and text generation) but uses CLIs to carry out all of the actions (issuing refunds, unblocking accounts, or whatever). It's possible to get very reliable and consistent work out of agents when they're using well wri…

Isn't this how we end up with things like: https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/high-profile-meta-a...

[deleted]

Re: Not everyone is using AI for everything

#214
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because typing “code” takes time and significant amounts of it. We are slowly waking up to the fact, which was always true, that “coding” is just a fanciful preparatory task in order to appease the spirits properly so that we may invoke the spirit of what we are actually after: a live, running process that does useful things. Code is completely useless when separated from that fact. Typing it is a complete waste of t…

> Typing it is a complete waste of time unless getting up close and personal with it will result in some kind of useful and actionable improvement in you or your understanding. I believe this is the general belief about basically every human skill, that if you stop doing the technical fundamentals you get worse at understanding the activity. The question is whether coding is like sailing a square-rigged wooden ship,…

The sci-fi novel A Fire in the Deep starts with describing a Software Archeologist, who digs through millennia of strata of layers of indirection and I think we could end up needing that one day.

Re: Not everyone is using AI for everything

#215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Making systems fully deterministic ignores the entire purpose of having agents involved. IMHO the best of both worlds option is agents working with deterministic CLIs. Where the agent does the reasoning (and text generation) but uses CLIs to carry out all of the actions (issuing refunds, unblocking accounts, or whatever). It's possible to get very reliable and consistent work out of agents when they're using well wri…

Isn't this how we end up with things like: https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/high-profile-meta-a...

Yes: https://simonwillison.net/2025/Jun/16/the-lethal-trifecta/

Although you can certainly do a better-and-worse job of preventing these kinds of issues.

Re: Not everyone is using AI for everything

#216
post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Any long-winded answer to a question is immediate out and has been for years. Why? If the winding path is actually interesting and gives you insights into how the person works, why would that be a bad thing?

Often the hiring manager will have the person to be hired somewhere in his report chain. So if a person can't effectively communicate and can't properly respond to a "I only have 2 minutes, shoot", then I am getting a future liability into the company that will slow down all future communications. I much rather prefer someone who needs 3 seconds to triage a question and tell me: "This is X, I know this, here is the s…

> There is no jointly with your boss

You're describing a coding sweatshop. What is the point of any discussion at all then? If the "boss" can't carve out enough time, that's their own problem. Letting that stress propagate to the team is plain bad leadership.

I know you might think some of these candidates don't have other much better choices to find work, but they absolutely do.

Re: Not everyone is using AI for everything

#217
post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That does sound like a bad org tho, sorry to say that. Not to disagree of course that time is limited, but in my experience, optimizing it this harshly leads to poor results, because eventually, you just get leapfrogged by reality. Hyper-optimized systems are brittle and can't really adapt to the market changing. But yeah, I guess they still need developers. Just doesn't sound like a fun job :D

Just trying to fix the misunderstanding: I am not saying that you will have a literal 25 seconds meeting with your boss's boss. I am just making a math argument taking typical orgchart ratios. So let me take this a step further. You want to meet your boss' boss for 10 minutes to present them something. 10 minutes of his time are an equivalent of more than 20 hours of your time. So if your initial idea was to "take ma…

I mean I am no expert, but to me it sounds like the org you're describing seems to lean away from the "engineering" side of things and into the "org for the sake of org".

Which might not be ideal, because "orging for the sake of org" to my understanding consumes significant resources not going into building products/marketshare/shareholder value.

But then again, I'm no hiring manager in such a structure, so this is probably just an uninformed take.

Re: Not everyone is using AI for everything

#218

> AI has gotten so good that despite any misgivings, “everyone is using A.I.” In my experience, it's a mixed bag. I wrote this comment[0], yesterday. It reflects my current work, and how I am integrating an LLM. I have used it for two parts of my project: 1) The backend (PHP), and 2) The frontend (Swift) It has been a huge help, in both, but #2 is a cautionary tale. It really needs adult supervision, in developing na…

I’m going to guess you are better at frontend than backend. The classic AI Gell-Mann effect.

The guess is correct.

The diagnosis, however, is not.

Have a great day!

Re: Not everyone is using AI for everything

#219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Replying as a hiring manager since this might help other post-grad job seekers: - Any long-winded answer to a question is immediate out and has been for years. - Not having used agents and not being able to comment on what to do and what not to do with them is immediate out since early this year.

your post on Who's Hiring provides some needed context... want a Flutter developer who is unusually strong at directing AI-driven software delivery. This is not a traditional "write the code yourself" role. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47223956

Not wrong. But my statement is true across organizations I have worked with in the past year, several of them not AI-native.

Re: Not everyone is using AI for everything

#220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume it's because he is seeking to pay rent, food bills, and other expenses through employment.

It's possible to work for an employer, and not have to compromise your values and or professional integrity. The attitude suggested by your response suggests you haven't lived that reality yet. Either way, I'd rather be rejected by an employer for speaking my truth, than lie to be somewhere I'd rather not be.

This isn't a value item for most people. Employer doesn't want ai used great handcoding or employer wants ai used great prompt coding.

My truth is I don't care either way . I get the sense that's the same for parent poster. They just want a job and to say the right thing to get past the hiring filter. Even if I did have a truth its not something I would put above being remote, pay and how a company develops software. I'd rather not have a truth and not have a daily standup.

Post reply on HN