The more time I spend accelerating my work with AI tools the more I realize how incredibly hard the craft of shipping useful software actually is. Sure, Claude Code and Codex can write (most of) the code for me - but the amount of technical knowledge I need to decide what and how to build remains enormous. As an example: I'm working on a system right now that works like Claude Artifacts, allowing custom HTML+JS apps…
AI has a multiplying effect on existing technical skills
311–320 of 344 posts
Re: AI has a multiplying effect on existing technical skills
#312Earlier quoted context omitted.
"the sand doesn't matter, only the beach does"? Makes no sense. Perfection is achieved when there is nothing left to take away. > In 100 years people will look at our ephemeral artifacts as silly little things Whereas they'll totally admire the hamster wheels in which people shoveled product? Well, I don't care either way. Craftsmanship and care have their own rewards, and shape the person engaging in them for the be…
> Perfection is achieved when there is nothing left to take away. Perfection in glue and plumbing? That's what 99% of software is. Even active-active distributed systems are glue and exist only to bridge ephemeral infrastructure. Everything will eventually be thrown out and rewritten. Nobody lauds the half-century old banking code written in COBOL. They want it ripped out and replaced. Nothing is "perfect". Not even…
> Nobody lauds the half-century old banking code written in COBOL. They want it ripped out and replaced.
So? That's true for actual plumbing, too. That changes nothing about the fundamental fact that a pipe that achieves a specific thing with N gram of materials and N meters of pipe length is better than something that is 100x times heavier and goes around the block several times just because why not.
> The code isn't the sand, it's the sandcastle.
Same difference. It makes just as little sense to say "the sand the sandcastle is made of doesn't matter, only the sandcastle does."
> But none of the code that runs either of those things will likely be running or capable of running.
Obviously. Who claimed otherwise?
Re: AI has a multiplying effect on existing technical skills
#313Re: AI has a multiplying effect on existing technical skills
#314Earlier quoted context omitted.
"the sand doesn't matter, only the beach does"? Makes no sense. Perfection is achieved when there is nothing left to take away. > In 100 years people will look at our ephemeral artifacts as silly little things Whereas they'll totally admire the hamster wheels in which people shoveled product? Well, I don't care either way. Craftsmanship and care have their own rewards, and shape the person engaging in them for the be…
>Perfection is achieved when there is nothing left to take away. But using the DNA example- perfect shouldn’t be the enemy of good. Our bodies are far from perfect but they’re functional and effective. If the biological imperative was perfect genomes and not functional genomes, there would be no life at all. I’m not a developer, I’m a consumer of digital products. I couldn’t care less, or even have the ability to not…
When we call out bloat in software, it's not because we don't know what the code is doing, but the opposite, because we know it better than the author. To compare that to life is kinda as far off the mark as possible.
> perfect shouldn’t be the enemy of good.
No, but when good gets drunk on sheer money and wants to take even the idea of perfection, of craftsmanship, of correctness and care out back, then maybe "perfection" should clap back every now and then.
> If the biological imperative was perfect genomes and not functional genomes, there would be no life at all.
It's not an imperative, it's a fact. The laws of physics are kinda strict that way, a puddle always settles at the lowest point. It doesn't settle at some "good enough" point. From what we know so far that never happens, even once, in this gigantic universe across these unfathomable timespans.
Why aren't you simply copy pasting your comment and repeating everything 5 times instead of saying it once? We all live by this, to some degree, we all know this intuitively to be true. We can be wasteful on purpose, out of whimsy or depression or whatever, but we're never confused about whether it's better to drink from a glass, where 300ml water in the glass mean 300ml water in the stomach, or drinking from a sieve, which means 99% of the water just goes to waste.
The fact that such simple things are even discussed to me prove the presence of "bad" factors. Of coercion, greed, fear, confusion, whatever, you name it. It gives me ants on top of a grass blade waiting for a cow because a fungus told it to vibes, when it comes to the "industry".
> I’m not a developer, I’m a consumer of digital products. I couldn’t care less, or even have the ability to notice, if code is perfect. I’m here to achieve a goal through software. If it achieves that goal, what is the problem from my end?
None IMO, because you're unlikely to shove your thing into everybody's life, or telling people to just give up and give in because it's all the same etc. At worst you'd be wasting your own electricity or holding your own data hostage.
Re: AI has a multiplying effect on existing technical skills
#315I had an Iron Man moment last week where I was “vibe coding” a UI design with component tests live on the other screen. Iterating by asking it to move things, reduce emphasis of an element, exploring layout options, etc. The loop was near realtime and felt amazing. The code it generated was awful. The kind of garbage that people who don’t know any better would ship: it looked right and it worked. But it was instantly…
Could it be that the fact that the thing you’re an expert at looked like garbage to you, but the things you’re not an expert at, looked just fine, is not a coincidence? You can talk to a bunch of designers who will say the opposite. Claude Design Studio generated this garbage UI, that I fixed manually, but it created great code j never could have that made it work.
Re: AI has a multiplying effect on existing technical skills
#316I had an Iron Man moment last week where I was “vibe coding” a UI design with component tests live on the other screen. Iterating by asking it to move things, reduce emphasis of an element, exploring layout options, etc. The loop was near realtime and felt amazing. The code it generated was awful. The kind of garbage that people who don’t know any better would ship: it looked right and it worked. But it was instantly…
Could it be that the fact that the thing you’re an expert at looked like garbage to you, but the things you’re not an expert at, looked just fine, is not a coincidence? You can talk to a bunch of designers who will say the opposite. Claude Design Studio generated this garbage UI, that I fixed manually, but it created great code j never could have that made it work.
Re: AI has a multiplying effect on existing technical skills
#317I mostly share Josh's opinion, but I think a lot of these posts that talk about Senior vs. Junior experience when working with AIs is kind of rubbish. Sure, you get better results as a Senior working with AI tooling and struggle more as a Junior. Nothing has changed in that equation except the amplification. What folks seem to avoid is that a Junior (in ANY subject) has the ability to LEARN so much faster with an AI…
Re: AI has a multiplying effect on existing technical skills
#318Earlier quoted context omitted.
>only in the bubble you live in Oh you mean the USA bubble? sorry i didn't consider somalia or wherever backwater place you live. >Again only in the bubble you live in. You want evidence? There are zero killer app products out there. Not even one, the ones that seems impressive like bun zig to rust, it's just an experiment and will see how bad it will unravel. It's called claude code and bun and practically every com…
you're a fake troll
You're truly a little coward, and this is not an insult, I'm just objectively stating who you are. You're afraid to face the fact that AI is on a trajectory to be a better programmer than you.
Re: AI has a multiplying effect on existing technical skills
#319Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've never seen it happen. You say this and it's likely one anecdotal claim. At the same time there's counter points like Bun getting rewritten in rust. This is talk and talk is cheap. Prove it, otherwise it's still a million dollar question... unanswered. HN is notoriously mentally deficient when it comes to AI. They were wrong about self driving cars (I sit in AI cars daily), they were wrong about AI getting used f…
Bun getting rewritten in Rust is not really the counter point you think it is. The rust version hasn't shipped yet, so there hasn't even been a chance to see if the code can be maintained. It's an impressive feat no doubt, but until they've maintained it on a months to years timeline, it's also just talk with no evidence.
The issue is a lot of people form definitive conclusions from blurry data. I'm challenging that type of bias. For example: How the hell do we know LLMs produce code that LLMs can't maintain? Like did you actually try it? And what about the instances where it worked? I don't think the answer is as clean/cut as yes/no. Even if we had data, most likely the data will be contradictory data in the sense that some AI projects worked, some descended into slop.
Re: AI has a multiplying effect on existing technical skills
#320Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bun getting rewritten in Rust is not really the counter point you think it is. The rust version hasn't shipped yet, so there hasn't even been a chance to see if the code can be maintained. It's an impressive feat no doubt, but until they've maintained it on a months to years timeline, it's also just talk with no evidence.
His comment doesnt even seem written by him, too busy doing nothing in a self driving car while codex work for him