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

AI is not a coworker, it's an exoskeleton

kasava.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 608 posts

Re: AI is not a coworker, it's an exoskeleton

#231

Post by andrekandre »

Havoc wrote: post #131

The amount of "It's not X it's Y" type commentary suggests to me that A) nobody knows and B) there is solid chance this ends up being either all true or all false Or put differently we've managed to hype this to the moon but somehow complete failure (see studies about zero impact on productivity) seem plausible. And similarly kills all jobs seems plausible. That's an insane amount of conflicting opinions being help i…

  > zero impact on productivity
i'm sure someone somewhere will find the numbers (pull requests per week, closed tickets per sprint etc) to make it look otherwise...

Re: AI is not a coworker, it's an exoskeleton

#232

Post by dasil003 »

jimbokun wrote: post #216
finnjohnsen2 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would disagree. Amplified meens me and you get more s** done. Unless there a limited amount of software we need to produce per year globally to keep everyone happy, then nobody wants more -- and we happen to be at that point right NOW this second. I think not. We can make more (in less time) and people will get more. This is the mental "glass half full" approach I think. Why not take this mental route instead? We d…

I do wonder though if we have about enough (or too much) software. I hear people complaining about software being forced on them to do things they did just fine without software before, than people complaining about software they want that doesn’t exist.

Yeah I think being annoyed by software is far more prevalent than wishing for more software. That said, I think there is still a lot of room for software growth as long as it's solving real problems and doesn't get in people's way. What I'm not sure about is what will the net effect of AI be overall when the dust settles.

On one hand it is very empowering to individuals, and many of those individuals will be able to achieve grander visions with less compromise and design-by-committee. On the other hand, it also enables an unprecedented level of slop that will certainly dilute the quality of software overall. What will be the dominant effect?

Re: AI is not a coworker, it's an exoskeleton

#233

Post by pu_pe »

jacquesm wrote: post #191
hintymad wrote: post #65

In the latest interview with Claude Code's author: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/lennys-podcast-product... , Boris said that writing code is a solved problem. This brings me to a hypothetical question: what if engineers stop contributing to open source, in which case would AI still be powerful enough to learn the knowledge of software development in the future? Or is the field of computer science plateaued to…

Prediction: open source will stop. Sure, people did it for the fun and the credits, but the fun quickly goes out of it when the credits go to the IP laundromat and the fun is had by the people ripping off your code. Why would anybody contribute their works for free in an environment like that?

I believe the exact opposite. We will see open source contributions skyrocket now. There are a ton of people who want to help and share their work, but technical ability was a major filter. If the barrier to entry is now lowered, expect to see many more people sharing stuff.

Re: AI is not a coworker, it's an exoskeleton

#234

Post by entrox »

overgard wrote: post #177
jacquesm wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not without some major breakthrough. What's hilarious is that all these developers building the tools are going to be the first to be without jobs. Their kids will be ecstatic: "Tell me again, dad, so, you had this awesome and well paying easy job and you wrecked it? Shut up kid, and tuck in that flap, there is too much wind in our cardboard box."

Couldn't agree more, isn't that the bizarre thing? "We have this great intellectually challenging job where we as workers have leverage. How can we completely ruin that while also screwing up every other white collar profession"

Why is it bizarre? It is inevitable. After all, AI has not ruined creative professions, it merely disrupted and transformed them. And yes, I fully understand my whole comment here being snarky, but please bear with me.

Let's rewind 4 years to this HN article titled "The AI Art Apocalypse": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32486133 and read some of the comments.

> Actually all progress will definitely will have a huge impact on a lot of lives—otherwise it is not progress. By definition it will impact many, by displacing those who were doing it the old way by doing it better and faster. The trouble is when people hold back progress just to prevent the impact. No one should be disagreeing that the impact shouldn't be prevented, but it should not be at the cost of progress.

Now it's the software engineers turn to not hold back progress.

Or this one: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34541693

> [...] At the same time, a part of me feels art has no place being motivated by money anyway. Perhaps this change will restore the balance. Artists will need to get real jobs again like the rest of us and fund their art as a side project.

Replace "Artists" with "Coders" and imagine a plumber writing that comment.

Maybe this one: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34856326

> [...] Artists will still exist, but most likely as hybrid 3d-modellers, AI modelers (Not full programmers, but able to fine-tune models with online guides and setups, can read basic python), and storytellers (like manga artists). It'll be a higher-pay, higher-prestige, higher-skill-requirement job than before. And all those artists who devoted their lives to draw better, find this to be an incredibly brutal adjustment.

Again, replace "Artists" with coders and fill in the replacement.

So, please get in line and adapt. And stop clinging to your "great intellectually challenging job" because you are holding back progress. It can't be that challenging if it can be handled by a machine anyway.

Re: AI is not a coworker, it's an exoskeleton

#235

Post by ochronus »

hintymad wrote: post #65

In the latest interview with Claude Code's author: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/lennys-podcast-product... , Boris said that writing code is a solved problem. This brings me to a hypothetical question: what if engineers stop contributing to open source, in which case would AI still be powerful enough to learn the knowledge of software development in the future? Or is the field of computer science plateaued to…

The creator of the hammer says driving nails into wood planks is a solved problem. Carpenters are now obsolete.

Re: AI is not a coworker, it's an exoskeleton

#236

Post by badgersnake »

icedchai wrote: post #84
badgersnake wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve been playing with qwen3-coder recently and that intern is definitely not getting hired, despite the rave reviews elsewhere.

Have you tried Claude Code with Opus or Sonnet 4.5? I've played around with a ton of open models and they just don't compare in terms of quality.

Honestly I’m not very keen on a SAAS company deciding what code I’m allowed to write, or charging me to write it.

Re: AI is not a coworker, it's an exoskeleton

#237

Post by cheema33 »

TrianguloY wrote: post #93

I like this analogy, and in fact in have used it for a totally different reason: why I don't like AI. Imagine someone going to a local gym and using an exosqueleton to do the exercises without effort. Able to lift more? Yes. Run faster? Sure. Exercising and enjoying the gym? ... No, and probably not. I like writing code, even if it's boilerplate. It's fun for me, and I want to keep doing it. Using AI to do that part…

> I like writing code, even if it's boilerplate. It's fun for me, and I want to keep doing it. Using AI to do that part for me is just...not fun.

Good news for you is that you can continue to do what you are doing. Nobody is going to stop you.

There are people who like programming in assembly. And they still get to do that.

If you are thinking that in the future employers may not want you to do that, then yes, that is a concern. But, if the AI based dev tool hype dies out, as many here suspect it will, then the employers will see the light and come crawling back.

Re: AI is not a coworker, it's an exoskeleton

#238

Post by ehnto »

ukuina wrote: post #228
ehnto wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just good writing structure. I get the feeling many people hadn't been exposed to good structure before LLMs. LLMs can definitely have a tone, but it is pretty annoying that every time someone cares to write well, they are getting accused of sounding like an LLM instead of the other way around. LLMs were trained to write well, on human writing, it's not surprising there is crossover.

Not so sure about that. There are many distinct LLM "smells" in that comment, like "A is true, but it hides something: unrelated to A" and "It's not (just) C, it's hyperbole D".

Sure, but you can read articles that predate LLMs which have the same so called tells.

Re: AI is not a coworker, it's an exoskeleton

#239

Post by ehnto »

0xpgm wrote: post #225
ehnto wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just good writing structure. I get the feeling many people hadn't been exposed to good structure before LLMs. LLMs can definitely have a tone, but it is pretty annoying that every time someone cares to write well, they are getting accused of sounding like an LLM instead of the other way around. LLMs were trained to write well, on human writing, it's not surprising there is crossover.

There is such a thing as a distinct LLM writing style that is not just good structure. Anyone who's read more than five books can tell that. And the comment itself seems completely LLM generated.

It's true that LLMs have a distinct style, but it does not preclude humans from writing in a similar style. That's where the LLMs got it from, people and training. There's certainly some emergent style that given enough text, you would likely never see from a human. But in a short comment like this, it's really not enough data to be making good judgements.
Post reply on HN