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

Vibe coding kills open source

arxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 304 posts

Re: Vibe coding kills open source

#231

Post by dimitri-vs »

WarmWash wrote: post #29

Small bespoke personalized on the spot apps are the future with LLMs. The future will absolutely not be "How things are today + LLMs" The paradigm now for software is "build a tool shed/garage/barn/warehouse full of as much capability for as many uses possible" but when LLMs can build you a custom(!) hammer or saw in a few minutes, why go to the shed?

This assumes an educated, passionate and patient user that 99% of people are not. They wont ask for a hammer - they will ask for a rock tied to a stick and get pissed off when it doesn't work like a hammer. They will ask for paint that doesn't drip. They will ask for electrical sockets they can install in their bathtub.

Re: Vibe coding kills open source

#232

Post by jdiff »

forgotpwd16 wrote: post #13
avaer wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We need a new git. (could be built on the current git) > One incredible thing was the ability to easily merge what was worth merging from forks, for instance I agree, this is amazing, and really reduces the wasted effort. But it only works if you know what exists and where.

Jujutsu?

Jujutsu has been the tool that actually got me into making full use of version control software. Before, through multiple attempts at grasping at the deeper fundamentals, I only learned the bare minimum git commands I needed to make commits and branches, and very careful merges. Jujutsu maps to a much clearer and simpler mental model. Blockchains are nifty and all, but awfully inconvenient to work with as meatbags.

Re: Vibe coding kills open source

#233

Post by zeroCalories »

rtp4me wrote: post #114
zeroCalories wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not all tools are right for all jobs. My spoon struggles to perform open heart surgery.

But as a heart surgeon, why would you ever consider using a spoon for the job? AI/LLMs are just a tool. Your professional experience should tell you if it is the right tool. This is where industry experience comes in.

As a heart surgeon with a phobia of sharp things I've found spoons to be great for surgery. If you find it unproductive it's probably a skill issue on your part.

Re: Vibe coding kills open source

#234

Post by gjadi »

torginus wrote: post #216
electroly wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LLMs are great at reviewing. This is not stupid at all if it's what you want; you can still derive benefit from LLMs this way. I like to have them review at the design level where I write a spec document, and the LLM reviews and advises. I don't like having the LLM actually write the document, even though they are capable of it. I do like them writing the code, but I totally get it; it's no different than me and the…

If LLMs are great at reviewing, why do they produce the quality of code they produce?

Imho it's because you worked before asking the LLM for input, thus you already have information and an opinion about what the code should look like. You can recognize good suggestions and quickly discard bad ones.

It's like reading, for better learning and understanding, it is advised that you think and question the text before reading it, and then again after just skimming it.

Whereas if you ask first for the answer, you are less prepared for the topic, is harder to form a different opinion.

It's my perception.

Re: Vibe coding kills open source

#235

Post by WarmWash »

rurp wrote: post #161
WarmWash wrote: post #29

Small bespoke personalized on the spot apps are the future with LLMs. The future will absolutely not be "How things are today + LLMs" The paradigm now for software is "build a tool shed/garage/barn/warehouse full of as much capability for as many uses possible" but when LLMs can build you a custom(!) hammer or saw in a few minutes, why go to the shed?

The vast majority of users make zero changes to the default settings of an app or device, even for software they use all the time and where some simple builtin adjustments would significantly improve their experience. I simply can't imagine a world where these same people all decide they constantly want to learn a completely unique UX for whatever piece of software they want to use.

Your missing the forest for the trees here.

Users will not fumble with the complex web of nested settings that engineers wet dream about.

But they will tell the LLM "I'd really like it if the tool bar only had the hammer and saw tools", and it will be done.

I cannot see software going in any other direction than a blank front end that users prompt LLMs to run scripts on top of.

Picture MS Word where the GUI is just a page and a sidebar for telling an LLM what you want it to do. And if it's not possible, the LLM could even write extensions and plugins that make it possible.

Software is going to completely change.

Re: Vibe coding kills open source

#236

Post by parliament32 »

WarmWash wrote: post #29

Small bespoke personalized on the spot apps are the future with LLMs. The future will absolutely not be "How things are today + LLMs" The paradigm now for software is "build a tool shed/garage/barn/warehouse full of as much capability for as many uses possible" but when LLMs can build you a custom(!) hammer or saw in a few minutes, why go to the shed?

"Why hire a website designer when you could just drag and drop in WordPress?"

And many businesses do, and it works, until it doesn't. I agree with you; that's the future I'm seeing for ad-hoc LLM apps.

Re: Vibe coding kills open source

#237

Post by eichin »

tomaytotomato wrote: post #6

I have been trying to use Claude code to help improve my opensource Java NLP location library. However trying to get it to do anything other than optimise code or fix small issues it struggles. It struggles with high level abstract issues. For example I currently have an issue with ambiguity collisions e.g. Input: "California" Output: "California, Missouri" California is a state but also city in Missouri - https://gi…

Trying not to turn this into "falsehoods developers believe about geographic names", but having done natural-language geocoding at scale (MetaCarta 2002-2010, acquired by Nokia) the most valuable thing was a growing set of tagged training data - because we were actually building the models out of that, but also because it would detect regressions; I suspect you needed something similar to "keep the LLMs in line", but you also need it for any more artisinal development approach too. (I'm a little surprised you even have a single-value-return search() function, issue#44 is just the tip of the iceberg - https://londonist.com/london/features/places-named-london-th... is a pretty good hint that a range of answers with probabilities attached is a minimum starting point...)

Re: Vibe coding kills open source

#238

Post by dimitri-vs »

Bishonen88 wrote: post #179
anticorporate wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're missing the enormous value in apps being standardized and opinionated. Standardized means that in addition to documentation, the whole internet is available to help you. Opinionated means as a user of an app in a new domain, you don't have to make a million decisions about how something should work to just get started. Sure, there will be more personalized apps for those who have a lot of expertise in…

Expertise won't be needed (it already isn't). One can create copies of apps with vague descriptions referencing those big apps: "Create a copy of xyz. It needs to look and behave similarly. I want these features ... And on top of that ...". Millions decisions not needed. A handful of vague descriptions of what one wants is all it takes today. I think claude and co. can even take in screenshots. Documentation won't be…

But millions discussions are needed and will always be needed?

"Create a copy of Amazon.com"

ok, how did you want to handle 3pl fulfilment and international red tape?

"No not that complicated, a minimal copy"

How minimal? How many servers should I provision? How vertically integrated should we get?

Etc.

I really want to see someone build an app of any value with minimal decisions made.

Re: Vibe coding kills open source

#239

Post by shimman »

blibble wrote: post #143
iknowSFR wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you’re going to be left behind. I’m going to be left behind. Every problem or concern you raise will adapt to the next world because those things are valuable. These concerns are temporary, not permanent.

> Then you’re going to be left behind. I really, really don't care I didn't get into programming for the money, it's just been a nice bonus

It's also such a weird claim, how the fuck are we going to be left behind when the skill level is just entering text in a box... a skill we literally do for our jobs..

Re: Vibe coding kills open source

#240

Post by spamizbad »

seniorThrowaway wrote: post #188
anticorporate wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're missing the enormous value in apps being standardized and opinionated. Standardized means that in addition to documentation, the whole internet is available to help you. Opinionated means as a user of an app in a new domain, you don't have to make a million decisions about how something should work to just get started. Sure, there will be more personalized apps for those who have a lot of expertise in…

AI's / LLM's have already been trained on best practices for most domains. I've recently faced this decision and I went the LLM custom app path, because the software I needed was a simple internal business type app. There is open source and COTS software packages available for this kind of thing, but they tend to be massive suites trying to solve a bunch of things I don't need and also a minefield of licensing, freem…

> AI's / LLM's have already been trained on best practices for most domains.

I've been at this long enough to see that today's best practices are tomorrow's anti-patterns. We have not, in fact, perfected the creation of software. And the your practices will evolve not just with the technology you use but the problem domains you're in.

I don't mean this as an argument against LLMs or vibe coding. Just that you're always going to need a fresh corpus to train them on to keep them current... and if the pool of expertly written code dries up, models will begin to stagnate.

Post reply on HN