Tools: Code Is All You Need • Hacker News Board

Re: Tools: Code Is All You Need

#231

Post by meowface » Sun, Jul 13, 2025, 1:43 PM UTC

alganet wrote: post #207

meowface wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You very much misunderstood the article (or, more likely, didn't even open it) because it fit your increasingly fringe skeptic narrative.

I don't get it. I misunderstood _because_ it fits my narrative? Or I didn't opened it _because_ it fits my narrative? I think I nailed it, and the article approach is representative of the "oh shit, it can't do it all" phase, which soon will be followed by "more traditional programming". These guys promised you an LLM that can do magic, from curing cancer to solve democracy, while delivering half-assed shit that does…

I meant the misinterpretation was formed because that particular misinterpretation was an interpretation that fit your narrative.

I would recommend reading the article in its entirety.

Re: Tools: Code Is All You Need

#232

Post by pxc » Sun, Jul 13, 2025, 5:06 PM UTC

forrestthewoods wrote: post #112

nativeit wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see your point, but bear with me here--it kind of is. I suppose if one wanted to be pedantically literal, then you are indeed correct. In every other meaningful consideration, the parent comment is. Maybe not Bash specifically, but #!/bin/sh is broadly available on nearly every connected device on the planet, in some capacity. From the perspective of how we could automate nearly anything, you'd be hard-pressed to f…

> you'd be hard-pressed to find something more universal than a shell script. 99.9% of my 20-year career has been spent on Windows. So bash scripts are entirely worthless and dead to me.

My first software internship in college, I was at a Microsoft shop. I ended up astonishing the people I worked with (who were all programmers) by automating solutions to some annoyances I ran into, some menial tasks I was assigned to do, etc. I did it all with Cygwin or MSYS, although I don't remember whether the scripts were Bash or Fish.

All of my co-workers could have written their own code to automate such tasks. They even had access to PowerShell, which was by then part of Windows.

But they didn't, because they didn't have a shell worth "living in" (PowerShell is much too slow-- and to a lesser extent, too verbose-- for daily interactive use), and writing code to automate the same tasks in a "real programming language" seemed laborious and boring enough that it always made sense to put it off and live with the mess.

Solid bash experience would benefit lots of Windows developers.

Re: Tools: Code Is All You Need

#233

Post by sizzle » Thu, Jul 17, 2025, 9:40 PM UTC

soulofmischief wrote: post #227

sizzle wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know you can do all that in meatspace for free right now, as our species has been doing since the dawn of civilization. I’m not convinced a literal screen strapped to your face can beat your human senses perceiving the world and other human beings in the flesh at a biochemical level. Not until people are strapped with IV drug releasing devices flooding their brains with happy chemicals to imitate the joy of real…

The cool thing is that I don't need your approval or permission to decide how I want to network with others, or in what ways I decide to integrate technology into my networking. > I’m not convinced a literal screen strapped to your face can beat your human senses perceiving the world and other human beings in the flesh at a biochemical level. No shit? I already said VR isn't a core part of the metaverse vision. Zucke…

I recall a study that says you can have at most a single digit amount of close friends. So what to you mean by network, acquaintances or business contacts?

It’s almost impossible to be fully engaged with more than a handful of people in the day to day.

Re: Tools: Code Is All You Need

#234

Post by alganet » Fri, Jul 18, 2025, 6:34 AM UTC

meowface wrote: post #231

alganet wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get it. I misunderstood _because_ it fits my narrative? Or I didn't opened it _because_ it fits my narrative? I think I nailed it, and the article approach is representative of the "oh shit, it can't do it all" phase, which soon will be followed by "more traditional programming". These guys promised you an LLM that can do magic, from curing cancer to solve democracy, while delivering half-assed shit that does…

I meant the misinterpretation was formed because that particular misinterpretation was an interpretation that fit your narrative. I would recommend reading the article in its entirety.

Please, enlighten me.