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

We charge $10k a week to delete AI-generated code

odra.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 263 posts

Re: We charge $10k a week to delete AI-generated code

#231

Post by acdha »

____mr____ wrote: post #213
socratic_weeb wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe vibe coding in general is a bad business strategy whether you use FOSS models or not because it means your product probably doesn't have any "secret sauce" (leaving code maintainability problems aside). By that I mean a carefully researched innovation that gives the edge to your product. Nevertheless, using FOSS models is clearly better for the reason you mentioned. I believe serious businesses will transit…

You can inject "secret sauce" through your domain knowledge or life experience. You could vibe code the "tedium" out of your app with little to no care about it using AI while paying close attention to the critical aspects of your product. Of course, the fact that all of your AI code usage is being monitored by the company that provides you the model/harness is also still means they can just steal your product whenev…

> Of course, the fact that all of your AI code usage is being monitored by the company that provides you the model/harness is also still means they can just steal your product whenever they want

Also anything which isn’t kept private can quickly be cloned. I think it’s going to be hard for a SaaS to stay profitable unless there’s a real-world tie-in to keep someone from pointing a bit at your app and cloning the observable behavior with just enough changes to claim they didn’t.

Re: We charge $10k a week to delete AI-generated code

#234

Post by zie1ony »

pbgcp2026 wrote: post #201

@zie1ony / OP - how do you make your clients believe you are not planting a crypto-locker or logic bomb or some other 3-letters-agencies "features"? And why would clients replace existing AI slop with your post-another-slop handwritten code? Do you check it for vulns and, most important, have you considered that later clients will sue you for ? Providing there is no major data leak, in which case you may end up provi…

I remember implementing very complex cryptographic scheme in pure C. After a week of hard work, my friend concluded: "Cryptography would be much easier if people just trust each other."

The truth is that it is my reputation on the line, so I also have to make sure dependencies I use don't mess up things as well. There is no good defense against it. In my contracts I undertake to act in a good faith and take the responibilites to the amount of my professional insurance. Honestly, it is different casy by case.

Re: We charge $10k a week to delete AI-generated code

#235

Post by simonw »

zie1ony wrote: post #221
simonw wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It still solves "breaks two other things".

True, but this way you can endup with so much testing code being 10x your core implementation.

That was a problem when testing code was expensive to create and expensive to update. That's no longer the case.

Plus, SQLite famously has 590x the test core compared to the implementation code, and they wrote that by hand! https://sqlite.org/testing.html

Re: We charge $10k a week to delete AI-generated code

#236

Post by js2 »

striking wrote: post #125
js2 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the submitted link: > we distil what it does FYI, "distill".

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/disti... "Fulfil" is the same way

Thanks. I double checked for alternate spelling but whichever dictionary I used didn't have the U.K. alternative. Good to know.

Re: We charge $10k a week to delete AI-generated code

#237

Post by Carrok »

zie1ony wrote: post #216
quuxplusone wrote: post #6

"Two weeks of warranty" jumped out at me. That's like "you have two weeks to find the thing we broke, or else we aren't responsible for it." In my experience, a good bug can hide for months more than two weeks! My codebases are definitely not in the target demographic for this service, though, and maybe if I were in the target group (bunch of LLM slop, trying to dig out of the hole, presumably no shipping product or…

This is a fair point. But these days bugs are not so scary anymore, so a client can vibecode a fix faster then getting me to fix it. Of course if Opus can't figure it out, I would always try to help. I have never left a client alone, warranty or not. This is just how I was raised.

> bugs are not so scary anymore

Umm, what?

Bugs can cause user data loss in production, or total system outages, or a slew of other Really Bad Things. How are you planning to vibecode your way out of that after the fact?

Re: We charge $10k a week to delete AI-generated code

#238

Post by 6510 »

I've thought about it and decided the animation wont do.

The page needs a generated video with giant cockroaches, mechs, 3 men in supper hero gear with swords & lab coats and there needs to be a puny human being saved. Then a dark voice narrating how the man created an unmaintainable mess using llms and that after a fierce battle that lasted a week he was saved by team slopfix. Beethoven symphony No. 5

Re: We charge $10k a week to delete AI-generated code

#239

Post by sandeepkd »

zie1ony wrote: post #209
sandeepkd wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like a easy way to get into consulting. Once you deliver the code back to the owners they are going to do the vibe coding again on the top whatever refactored code you get back. In other words it can become a perpetual cycle.

The goal is to avoid it and build such a structure and guidlines for the codebase, so it can refactor itself when needed, but based on the architecture defined by us. With good set of docs and new feature definition you can most of the time use /grill-me with good outcomes.

Call me pessimistic or realistic, the code and architecture is just a reflection of the author/organization. The only way it can change/improve is if you either switch the people/organization or invest in their improvement/continuous learning.

Re: We charge $10k a week to delete AI-generated code

#240

Post by dpark »

ed_mercer wrote: post #127
dpark wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's de-personalized I had an interesting conversation with a junior engineer who made this observation. She shipped a feature, we gathered data, and based on data we pivoted to a different design. She called out that she wasn’t attached to the code because AI wrote it. Not that she didn’t care about quality or effectiveness of the product, but the personal emotional attachment to the code itself was not there. Pro…

So then, why have the junior engineer in the first place?

This feels like you just have that retort in your pocket waiting to use it because it didn’t seem relevant here.

What does this even mean? Why have the junior engineer if they aren’t irrationally invested in the code the write?

Post reply on HN