Live data from Hacker News

Domain expertise has always been the real moat

brethorsting.com

321–330 of 592 posts

Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat

#321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Not really. Most people continue to remain in a specific domain from their internship days, and professional networks develop.

Historically, startups were the traditional path for a generalist to build domain expertise because most startups couldn't be picky with talent, but the market has changed.

In all honesty, too much fat did develop in the tech industry over the last 6 years. Traditional hiring pipelines (eg. Limiting early career recruiting to grads from top 10-20 CS/ECE/EECS programs nationally along with Vets and some grads from decent regional programs) still net good calibre talent worth their weight in gold, but others just aren't working out.

Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat

#322

While 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…

You're doing a bit of a "true Scotsman fallacy" here.

Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat

#323

While 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 ship has sailed. Anyone who works in a field is now considered a domain expert (or "SME") even if they're nothing of the sort. There should ideally be another term that's a superset, but I doubt it would ever catch on.

Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat

#324

While 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…

>One of the things he told me, and that I also observed, was that the vast majority of financial experts (basically, the people in the accounting department of companies) had an extremely difficult time just telling him what the rules of any particular transaction should be

We have internalized more knowledge than we can explain sounds like the textbook definition of Polanyi's paradox:"Polanyi's paradox, named in honour of the British-Hungarian philosopher Michael Polanyi, is the theory that human knowledge of how the world functions and of our own capability are, to a large extent, beyond our explicit understanding" [0]

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polanyi%27s_paradox

Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat

#325

These guys live in their heads, so when the world changes, they invent reasons why they’re still relevant. What’s the truth, though? Are we still relevant? My experience is that three years ago, when this kind of AI work first started becoming usable, I had to talk to the AI a lot. I had to review a lot. I had to change a lot. These days, I talk to the AI less and fix less, while the amount and quality of the output…

[flagged]

Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat

#326
As a doctor who learned how to program, I started by writing useless Chrome extensions. One thing I learned early was that programmers generally do not like learning the nuances of medicine, and many are quite open about how little they want to learn it. I have tried convincing my fellow residents to learn a simple language like Lua or even just Python, but the resistance is even greater, despite the fact that they constantly express how they have always wanted to learn programming like I did.

I even went as far as setting up their IDEs, configuring their environments, and encouraging them to just vibe-code. It seems that the mental friction involved in switching domains is too high for most people to justify the reward. Perhaps the reward itself is not compelling enough, or perhaps this is simply the limit of adult motivation.

I started programming with Python around the time GPT-3 arrived, when Cursor had generous free tiers and excellent starter plans. A few Raspberry Pis, laptops, desktops, and countless hours of tinkering later, I discovered how much I enjoyed solving problems with software. There is so much to learn from the programming world: the concept of open-source software, the idea that people from anywhere in the world can collaborate on the same codebase, and the fact that many do so with little or no expectation of reward.

As this post points out, in the project I am currently working on—a comprehensive Clinical Decision Support System—it feels almost second nature to translate the rules, hidden rules, social dynamics of hospitals, and the common mistakes that we and our juniors make every day into software. Taking those observations and turning them into systems that work is surprisingly intuitive.

Perhaps the most valuable thing I gained from medical school, combined with my own personality, is the desire to keep learning. I naturally gravitated toward systems thinking, and the path forward seems clear to me: become a true expert in whichever specialties I ultimately practice, while simultaneously becoming highly skilled at systems thinking.

As for systems thinking itself, I find it useful to create rules not only for the codebase but also for the testing harnesses and development processes around it. The goal is to build systems that can enforce quality automatically as the codebase grows, ensuring that standards scale without requiring constant manual oversight.

Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat

#327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Not really. Most people continue to remain in a specific domain from their internship days, and professional networks develop. Historically, startups were the traditional path for a generalist to build domain expertise because most startups couldn't be picky with talent, but the market has changed. In all honesty, too much fat did develop in the tech industry over the last 6 years. Traditional hiring pipelines (eg. L…

I'm afraid you appear to be contradicting yourself by saying internship in one comment and stating that companies don't bother with onboarding employees with no knowledge in a previous comment.

Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat

#328

Earlier 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…

> 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 throughput.

Yes, technically, but note that this entire thing can be anything from crucial to completely worthless depending on the domain.

You need insane scalability for a social network or a streaming service, you don’t need any real scalability for (completely made up) managing a fleet of airplanes or the internal logistics of a zoo.

Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat

#329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. Most people continue to remain in a specific domain from their internship days, and professional networks develop. Historically, startups were the traditional path for a generalist to build domain expertise because most startups couldn't be picky with talent, but the market has changed. In all honesty, too much fat did develop in the tech industry over the last 6 years. Traditional hiring pipelines (eg. L…

I'm afraid you appear to be contradicting yourself by saying internship in one comment and stating that companies don't bother with onboarding employees with no knowledge in a previous comment.

An internship is fine for onboarding becuase you aren't paying a FT employee level salary or benefits, and expectations are your hire is still learning but has some aptitude or interest in becoming a domain expert.

On the other hand, hiring a mid-career SWE who spent much of their career in one domain who is transitioning to another is a significant risk without additional social proof such as referrals where someone actually vouches for their skills.

Re: Domain expertise has always been the real moat

#330

While 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 have a strong suspicion that folks who have a high degree of domain expertise in a particular area will fail as software builders even in an agentic world because they will struggle to elucidate clearly the rules in their head that they've learned over years.

Maybe they need a build a hybrid expertise of "domain" and "software engineering". For example, robotic surgery requires expert surgeons to build sufficient expertise in robotics

Also, noticed a pretty high karma for a throwaway account.

Post reply on HN