Live data from Hacker News

Thoughts on slowing the fuck down

mariozechner.at

281–290 of 505 posts

Re: Thoughts on slowing the fuck down

#281
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also seems like massive consolidation has caused issues too. Everyone is on Github. Everyone is on AWS. Everyone is behind cloudflare. Whenever an issue happens here it effects everyone and everyone sees it. In the past with smaller services those services did break all the time, but the outage was limited to a much smaller area. Also systems were typically less integrated with each other so one service being down…

The power company is massively consolidated, as is the water supply, telephone service. These are monolithic, monopolistic entities. But they are also very reliable (failures are usually isolated by region, or a result of natural disaster). What leads to more failure is when you don't engineer those consolidated entities to be reliable. Tech companies have none of the legal requirements or incentives to be reliable,…

I mean recommend professional software engineering licenses here on HN and it goes over like a turd in a punch bowl. Everyone knows where the search for more profit was going, no one wanted to get off the ride though.

Re: Thoughts on slowing the fuck down

#282
post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What are you building? This x1000. The last 10 years in the software industry in particular seems full of meta-work. New frameworks, new tools, new virtualization layers, new distributed systems, new dev tooling, new org charts. Ultimately so we can build... what exactly? Are these necessary to build what we actually need? Or are they necessary to prop up an unsustainable industry by inventing new jobs? Hard to sha…

> Are these tools necessary to build what we actually need? I think the entire software industry has reached a saturation point. There's not really anything missing anymore. Existing tools do 99% of what we humans could need, so you're just getting recycled and regurgitated versions of existing tools... slap a different logo and a veneer on it, and its a product.

Oh ye of little faith in the possible.

We still don’t have truly transparent transference in locally-run software. Go anywhere in the world, and your locally running software tags along with precisely preserved state no matter what device you happen to be dragging along with you, with device-appropriate interfacing.

We still don’t have single source documentation with lineage all the way back to the code.

We still don’t treat introspection and observability as two sides of a troubleshooting coin (I think there are more “sides” but want to keep the example simple). We do not have the kind of introspection on modern hardware that Lisp Machines had, and SOTA observability conversations still revolve around sampling enough at the right places to make up for that.

We still don’t have coordination planes, databases, and systems in general capable of absorbing the volume of queries generated by LLM’s. Even if LLM models themselves froze their progress as-is, they’re plenty sophisticated enough when deployed en masse to overwhelm existing data infrastructure.

The list is endless.

IMHO our software world has never been so fertile with possibilities.

Re: Thoughts on slowing the fuck down

#283
post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The world hasn't ended yet because it's still 2026 but it doesn't mean it won't. All signs point to you being a doomer that is excellent at moving the goal post. "If it doesn't happen tomorrow surely it will happen the next day." You can do this until the end of time. A waste of brain cycles for anybody with a real job. This is the exact same pattern for every single kind of doomer and they are all wrong in the exa…

> All signs point to you being a doomer that is excellent at moving the goal post. All signs point to it being really easy for you to dismiss "doomers" as wrong and "scientists" as right retroactively. If someone was wrong about the direction of the climate crisis 20 years ago they were a doomer. If they were right they were a scientist. Easy! You can apply this to anything that went to shit with the world in the pas…

> If someone predicted the financial crisis of 2008, they were not a doomer, they were a particularly savvy financial analyst.

Zoom out buddy, the 2008 financial crisis is a blip. The world's financial system is almost exactly the same as it was pre-2008. Hardly the collapse that made the world stop spinning that doomers have a fetish for. That's not a good example to support your argument.

You fundamentally cannot grasp the concept of doomerism. Doomerism isn't simply observing some first order effect "The oceans will increase by 2 degrees".

Doomerism is observing that first order effect and trying to assert that we should change behavior at a societal level because they above everybody else, can predict what the secondary or tertiary+ effects are for society. "The oceans will increase by 2 degrees, all marine life will perish, hurricanes will make vast swaths of the world uninhabitable. Therefore we should stop eating beef!"

And they are wrong about it every - single - time. Do you need examples?

Society has a long history of ignoring doomers, and the impact? Society is right and Doomers are consistently wrong.

Society keeps going. We have all of history up until the current moment, but from that we understand so far, Doomers have never been right about how disruptive their observations are for society at large. If you want to provide a contradiction to this statement please do so.

Nuclear power doomers -> completely wrong. Fukashima was the latest that proved this

Covid doomers -> wrong. in 50 years covid will be as forgotten as the spanish flu was.

Climate doomers -> wrong. famines are down across the globe and population still growing, still no clear example of the disruption to society or world in a way that is new. For any disruption we can find historical disruptions of the same category with more impact to humans and the world. Floods? More people killed in historical floods and more societies extinguished from them >100 years ago. Fires? More people killed in fires and more cities completely burned down from them >100 years ago.

Overpopulation doomers -> wrong, population still growing, but leveling off and not collapsing

AI doomers -> wrong on both sides so far. no bubble pop, capabilities still advancing, humans are also still relevant

Peak oil doomers -> completely wrong, more oil being discovered, didn't account for technology, didn't account for other forms of energy

With this kind of track record, you'd think that doomers would have enough self reflection to realize that their model of reality is insufficient at predicting outcomes and shut the fuck up, but nope - they just keep on trying to force a square peg into a round hole while annoying everybody around them who are trying to do something to move the needle towards a better life that doesn't involve becoming a vegetable so the earth can heal or whatever.

Compare this against another model of reality: Whatever challenges humans face, when it's dire enough, we will adapt and overcome.

You can backtest this model against all of human history. It would be dishonest to say that this model isn't more accurate so far than whatever model you're using as a doomer.

No need for doomers to virtue signal and lecture everybody about their shitty model of reality that fails to backtest

Re: Thoughts on slowing the fuck down

#284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What are you building? This x1000. The last 10 years in the software industry in particular seems full of meta-work. New frameworks, new tools, new virtualization layers, new distributed systems, new dev tooling, new org charts. Ultimately so we can build... what exactly? Are these necessary to build what we actually need? Or are they necessary to prop up an unsustainable industry by inventing new jobs? Hard to sha…

> The last 10 years in the software industry in particular seems full of meta-work. New frameworks, new tools, new virtualization layers, new distributed systems, new dev tooling, new org charts. Ultimately so we can build... what exactly? Are these necessary to build what we actually need? Or are they necessary to prop up an unsustainable industry by inventing new jobs? The overwhelming majority of real jobs are not…

Not that you asked… But I would be happy with a junior position writing production C or ASM - but I assume that those sorts of positions are on the other end of the same boat. Who the hell has any use for an amateur dev. with an autistic fascination and _zero_ practical experience?

Someone here shared an article here, recently, espousing something along the lines of "home garden programming." I see software development moving in this direction, just like machining did: Either in a space-age shop, that looks more like a lab, with a fix-axis "machining center," or in the garage with Grandpappy's clapped out Atlas - and nothing in between.

Re: Thoughts on slowing the fuck down

#285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What are you building? This x1000. The last 10 years in the software industry in particular seems full of meta-work. New frameworks, new tools, new virtualization layers, new distributed systems, new dev tooling, new org charts. Ultimately so we can build... what exactly? Are these necessary to build what we actually need? Or are they necessary to prop up an unsustainable industry by inventing new jobs? Hard to sha…

In my lifetime software has given us: * the ability to find essentially any information ever created by anyone anywhere at anytime, * the ability to communicate with anyone on Earth over any distance instantaneously in audio, video, or text, * the ability to order any product made anywhere and have it delivered to our door in a day or two, * the ability to work with anyone across the world on shared tasks and project…

I’m not sophisticated enough to enjoy abstract art. Maybe AI will bring abstract software projects to the world next.

I can imagine all the people staring at these software projects amazed at the genius it must have taken to create them. :)

Re: Thoughts on slowing the fuck down

#286

What the article doesn't touch on is the vendor lock-in that is currently underway. Many corps are now moving to an AI-based development process that is reliant on the big AI providers. Once the codebase has become fully agentic, i.e., only agents fundamentally understand it and can modify it, the prices will start rising. After all, these loss making AI companies will eventually need to recoup on their investments.…

> the prices will start rising. After all, these loss making AI companies will eventually need to recoup on their investments. I would bet a lot of money that the price of LLM assistance will go down, not up, as the hardware and software advance. Every genre-defining startup seems to go through this same cycle where the naysayers tell us that it's all going to collapse once the investment money runs out. This was def…

> almost nobody noticed

Rideshare costs are much higher than they have been in years past. Everyone noticed

Re: Thoughts on slowing the fuck down

#287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The world hasn't ended yet because it's still 2026 but it doesn't mean it won't. All signs point to you being a doomer that is excellent at moving the goal post. "If it doesn't happen tomorrow surely it will happen the next day." You can do this until the end of time. A waste of brain cycles for anybody with a real job. This is the exact same pattern for every single kind of doomer and they are all wrong in the exa…

>If doomers were good at predicting these events and how it will play out they'd all be rich as hell, but no, they are for the most part a bunch of broke whiners. Oh, the classic "if you're so smart then why aren't you rich" non argument. I'm sure Carl Sagan was a just whiny loser because he didn't figure out how to become a billionaire from knowing how physics works. His prediction that the planet would warm several…

> People who push dangerous neoliberal propaganda like carbon capture or "infinite growth on a finite planet is possible"

Good thing we are not confined to a closed system in any practical sense. You act like we haven't already used space for economic growth. It's also a good thing that the concept of "growth" in this context is not limited by physical constraints. You're talking about growth of value, not growth in a physical sense. Did you think the valuation of every company was based on something physical 1:1? Do you live somewhere whose financial system is based on a gold standard or something? There are multiple levels where your idea falls apart.

Crazy to so confidently assert an idea which is conceptually flawed on a surface level.

You actually think the economy has reached the point of maximum growth due to the laws of thermodynamics? Please tell me you didn't formulate your entire worldview on this idea because it's unlikely that you can function in this society in a way that makes your life better or those around you better with this flawed model of reality.

Doomers are always hurting themselves first and foremost and then dragging everybody else around them down with them.

Re: Thoughts on slowing the fuck down

#288
post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Engineering is two things: 1. Applied physics - Software is immediately disqualified. Symbols have no physics. 2. Ethics - Lives and livelihoods depend on you getting it right. Software people want to be disqualified because that stuff is so boring, but this is becoming a more serious issue with every passing day.

Software is applied mathematics, though

And still not applied physics

Re: Thoughts on slowing the fuck down

#289

> Companies claiming 100% of their product's code is now written by AI consistently put out the worst garbage you can imagine. Not pointing fingers, but memory leaks in the gigabytes, UI glitches, broken-ass features, crashes One thing about the old days of DOS and original MacOS: you couldn't get away with nearly as much of this. The whole computer would crash hard and need to be rebooted, all unsaved work lost. You…

I think you're just recalling the few software products that were actually good. There was plenty of crap software that would crash and lose your work in the old days.

Lol right!

Remember when OS uptime was super duper important? Now it's a given that you can basically never restart your computer and be fine.

Post reply on HN