there is a big difference between seeing that pairs of input and output are correct, and knowing that the system is correct. there are invinitely many in and output pairs and only checking some while you vibe code your tool is never going to be a reliable method
Domain expertise has always been the real moat
311–320 of 592 posts
Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat
#312While I agree that domain expertise has always been a moat, I believe the author is missing something critical: there is a big difference between being able to verify the output of a system is correct, and being able to tell a system how to generate the correct output to begin with. Personal example: I had a software engineering colleague who was the best coder of financial management systems I've ever encountered. H…
I think that you raise some excellent points here. I want to dive deeper into what is meant by domain knowledge -- as a I see it. This phrase comes to mind: "Those who know, do. Those that understand, teach." (Google search tells me that it is frequently misattributed to Aristotle.) People who cannot clearly articulate rules for their domain only "do". However, those that can clearly articulate will "teach". Thus, I would say true domain knowledge is the ability to teach that domain to others.
Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat
#313While I agree that domain expertise has always been a moat, I believe the author is missing something critical: there is a big difference between being able to verify the output of a system is correct, and being able to tell a system how to generate the correct output to begin with. Personal example: I had a software engineering colleague who was the best coder of financial management systems I've ever encountered. H…
I guess the flip side to that is the iterative conversation to develop these specifications is exactly what AI chatbots are good at.
It's also the main reason why very structured AI agent orchestration for software engineering modelled on rigid processes fails to really provide much value.
Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat
#314"So the most valuable person in this new world is the one who has both skills because they can verify at both layers. They know the generated code is sound and they know the answers it produces are true." This has always been true since the dawn of programming.
Yes, but most people (especially a large portion on HN and Reddit) do not internalize it. A SWE who has always worked in DevTooling companies will always be preferred by DevTooling companies over a generalist. A SWE who has always worked in AdTech will always be preferred by AdTech companies over a generalist. etc etc. Software fundamentals - though useful - are table stakes skills at this point. No business wants to…
And therefore there will be a huge knowledge gap as companies refuse to hire anyone who hasn't worked in the field for 5+ years and people who want to work in that field but haven't don't get hired.
Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat
#315While I agree that domain expertise has always been a moat, I believe the author is missing something critical: there is a big difference between being able to verify the output of a system is correct, and being able to tell a system how to generate the correct output to begin with. Personal example: I had a software engineering colleague who was the best coder of financial management systems I've ever encountered. H…
Yes. The author stumbled on the p vs np problem but with humans. Verification is easy. Solving is the millennium prize question.
Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat
#316While I agree that domain expertise has always been a moat, I believe the author is missing something critical: there is a big difference between being able to verify the output of a system is correct, and being able to tell a system how to generate the correct output to begin with. Personal example: I had a software engineering colleague who was the best coder of financial management systems I've ever encountered. H…
I agree with your point that people “from” the domain aren’t automatically equipped to start AI-building software in the domain, exactly because they often lack one of the most crucial software development skills — being able to (and having the desire to) describe a complex system with a finite set of deterministic rules.
But I don’t think we should be calling these people “domain experts”. I think we should reserve that name for the other group, for the people who truly and deeply understand the domain, the whys and whats and why nots.
Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat
#317While the article is interesting, it makes assumptions that are not explicitly stated. And the one strong assumption that makes no sense to me is that they discuss team size = 1. Sure, a domain expert now can use an agent. But he might as well work with a development team, or a developer that uses an agent. That's pretty standard I would say.
Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat
#318[flagged]
Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat
#319Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Domain expertise is hard but not that hard compared to the insane mental discipline required to write efficient scalable code "efficient scalable code" is just as vague as good code. How are you going to know your code is scalable if you don't understand your domain? Scalability is not something you sprinkle onto code.
Are you kidding me. What has domain got to do with efficiency and scalability. Efficiency is about using minimum cpu cycles or minimum memory or minimum network round trip or more generically using minimum/optimum resources to get something done. Scalability is about minimizing bottlenecks and linear scaling so one can just copy and execute by adding more nodes/resources and expect correctness and increased throughpu…
> Efficiency is about using minimum cpu cycles or minimum memory or minimum network round trip or more generically using minimum/optimum resources to get something done.
No profitable business wants to pay you for writing code that uses "a minimum" of a resource. It wants to pay you to find the right balance between resource usage, time-to-market, operating cost, code complexity and probably several other factors.
Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat
#320My friend is an electrical engineer and just passed a FIDE chess rating of 2000. Has played for 30 years, started the chess club in high school. Knows a little programming from the stuff he had to do with microcontrollers in college. I'm an infra/admin jack of all trades with a comp sci degree and have been a hobby programmer for 30 years. I have a Lichess rating of 1000 on a good day. We tried doing a chess bot comp…
Writing software for which a full spec is available before you begin — in this case the rules of chess — was an easy problem even before AI.