Live data from Hacker News

Stop Slopware

stopslopware.net

31–40 of 171 posts

Re: Stop Slopware

#31
post #29

You can't be serious. > When you publish something under the banner of open–source, you implicitly enter a stewardship role. You’re not just shipping files, you’re making a contribution to a shared commons. That carries certain responsibilities: clarity about purpose, honesty about limitations, and a basic alignment with the community’s collaborative ethos. (from the second link) You're not just writing angry screeds…

I'm going to give the author the benefit of the doubt here. Not all "you're not X, you're Y" was written by an LLM.

Re: Stop Slopware

#32

[flagged]

the issue is false advertising.

you'll understand the first time you lose half an hour evaluating a library that has all the old signs of competent design and even the trivial examples don't work and you realize the project was generated and you've had your time completely wasted

Re: Stop Slopware

#33

Why would any actual software engineer be against slopware? When it inevitably all comes crashing down because there was no actual software architecture or understanding of the code, someone will have to come in to make the actual product. Hopefully by then we will have realistic expectations for the LLM, have skilled up, and we as a community treat them as just another feature in the IDE.

> someone will have to come in to make the actual product.

My experience has been more that they expect you to fix the broken mess, not rebuild it properly.

Re: Stop Slopware

#34

> if you’re doing this for your own learning: you will learn better without AI. This is not the distinction I would want to tell newcomers. AI is extremely good for finding out what the most common practices are for all kinds of situations. That's a powerful learning tool. Besides, learning how to use a tool well (one that we can expect professionals to use) is part of learning. Now most common practices and best pra…

[dead]

Re: Stop Slopware

#35

[flagged]

Most of these people are either: Students Activists Hyper opinionated and “principled” engineers (that won’t touch AI) University professors Engineers working with Linux and Free software who hate AI. They all secretly use ChatGPT when it launched and still do.

Nah, they hate Altman, and many are running DeepSeek @ home.

Re: Stop Slopware

#36
post #6

> if you’re doing this for your own learning: you will learn better without AI . I'm certain that's not true. AI is the single biggest gift we could possible give to people who are learning to program - it's shaved that learning curve down to a point where you don't need to carve out six months of your life just to get to a point where you can build something small and useful that works. AI only hurts learning if you…

AI only hurts learning if you let it. You can still use AI and learn effectively if you are thoughtful about the way you apply it.

I think that's very important.

Never mind six months; with AI, "you" can "build" something small and useful that works in six minutes. But "you" almost certainly didn't learn anything, and I think it's quite questionable if "you" "built" something.

I have found AI to be a great tool for learning, but I see it -- me, personally -- as a very slippery slope into not learning at all. It is so easy, so trivial, to produce a (seemingly accurate) answer to just about any question whatsoever, no matter how mundane or obscure, that I can really barely engage my own thinking at all.

On one hand, with the goal of obtaining an answer to a question quickly, it's awesome.

On the other hand, I feel like I have learned almost nothing at all. I got precisely, pinpointed down, the exact answer to the question I asked. Going through more traditional means of learning -- looking things up in books, searching web sites, reading tutorials, etc. -- I end up with my answer, but I also end up with more context, and a deeper+broader understanding of the overall problem space.

Can I get that with AI? You bet. And probably even better, in some respects. But I have to deliberately choose to. It's way too easy to just grab the exact answer I wanted and be on my way.

I feel like that is both good and bad. I don't want to be too dismissive of the good, but I also feel like it would be unwise to ignore the bad.

Whoa hey though, isn't this just exactly like books? Didn't, like, Plato and all them Greek cats centuries ago say that writing things down would ruin our brains, and what I'm claiming here is 100% the same thing? I don't think so. I see it as a matter of scale. It's a similar effect -- you probably do lose something (whether if it's valuable or not is debatable) when you choose to rely on written words rather than memorize. But it's tiny. With our modern AI tools, there is potential to lose out on much more. You can -- you don't have to, but you can -- do way more coasting, mentally. You can pretty much coast nonstop now.

Re: Stop Slopware

#37

As a practitioner I also inherently believe in well written software but as a lifelong learner, things change, and evolve. There is absolutely no reason why software today has to be written like software of yesterday. There is no need to be so prescriptive about how software is made. In the end the best will win on the merits. The bad software will die under its own weight with no think pieces necessary. On the other…

> There is absolutely no reason why software today has to be written like software of yesterday.

I get what you're saying, but the irony is that AI tools have sort of frozen the state of the art of software development in time. There is now less incentive to innovate on language design, code style, patterns, etc., when it goes outside the range of what an LLM has been trained on and will produce.

Re: Stop Slopware

#38

My reflex is to call the website useless because the problem isn't usually software produced by individuals. My problem is the buggy messes that trillion dollar corporations produce.

I mean, look at Microsoft. They're a tiny little 5 trillion dollar company and their own cloud storage software can't reliably extract zip files compressed with their own compression software on their own flagship operating system.

How dare some nobody in a third world country use AI resources to accelerate the development of some process that fixes an issue for them and occasionally ask you to buy them a coffee when a poor sad pathetic evil worthless hateful disgusting miserable useless 5 trillion dollar company that actively hates you does the same thing with worse results that makes your life more miserable while lining their pockets with every penny in the entire world?!

Re: Stop Slopware

#39

As a practitioner I also inherently believe in well written software but as a lifelong learner, things change, and evolve. There is absolutely no reason why software today has to be written like software of yesterday. There is no need to be so prescriptive about how software is made. In the end the best will win on the merits. The bad software will die under its own weight with no think pieces necessary. On the other…

Software engineers are desperate to have their work be like machining aircraft parts.

It’s a tool. No one cares about code quality because the person using your code isn’t affected by it. There are better and worse tools. No one cares whether a car is made with SnapOn tools or milled on HAAS machines. Only that it functions.

We know there is no long term merit to this idea just looking back at the last 40 years of coding.

Re: Stop Slopware

#40
post #37

As a practitioner I also inherently believe in well written software but as a lifelong learner, things change, and evolve. There is absolutely no reason why software today has to be written like software of yesterday. There is no need to be so prescriptive about how software is made. In the end the best will win on the merits. The bad software will die under its own weight with no think pieces necessary. On the other…

> There is absolutely no reason why software today has to be written like software of yesterday. I get what you're saying, but the irony is that AI tools have sort of frozen the state of the art of software development in time. There is now less incentive to innovate on language design, code style, patterns, etc., when it goes outside the range of what an LLM has been trained on and will produce.

Citation needed. I see no reason at all why that's true any more than the screwdriver freezing the state of home design in time.
Post reply on HN