Live data from Hacker News

Is AI causing a repeat of frontend’s lost decade?

mastrojs.github.io

341–350 of 352 posts

Re: Is AI causing a repeat of frontend’s lost decade?

#341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would much rather have software that works but lacks accessibility features than software that's broken but also has some broken accessibility features sprinkled in. The former is useful to many people, while the latter is useful to no one. But the key here is: LLMs don't have latent rigor, nor any other kind of rigor.

But software was already in a horrible state before AI, so your dichotomy doesn't work. The status quo with pre-AI Human Written software on a pedestal is that it doesn't work, and it lacks accessibility, polish, performance considerations, UX considerations, tests, and more. The built-in rigor is trivial to prove. Just put Opus 4.8 in plan mode and tell it to plan something, like a vt100 emulator. The question isn't…

> software was already in a horrible state before AI, so your dichotomy doesn't work.

It depends on the software. But, generally speaking, I try to use and write the best software available that solves my problem, even if it's one of a kind; it doesn't really matter if the other 99.9999% of the software in the space is broken.

Given 1000 hours to work on a problem, an LLM will continue to yeet out mediocre variations on a theme. Give me 1000 hours to work, and my product will keep getting 1% or 2% better until it's much better than any shit an LLM would spit out.

Similarly, I would much rather use someone else's emulator that they spent 1000 hours on than have AI yeet out some mediocre shit that kinda works, but is really just a mindless exploitation of something that someone else wrote that was actually good.

Then, you follow that with, "Yeah, but AI just allows you to iterate faster and skip the boring stuff, so that you make your product better even faster."

And then I follow that with, "The part where you take it apart piece by piece and study each piece and get kicked in the head by the realities of your lack of understanding is the part that's actually valuable, and it's precisely what you're skipping with an LLM"

Re: Is AI causing a repeat of frontend’s lost decade?

#342
post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This opinion should only come from a CS grad who is accustomed to building CRUD apps and allergic to any real world problem domain. At my work in insurance solutions we're solving perabyte scale problems. We do not have a Rust developer in the team, but taught ourselves with the AI and now automating workflows which took days to under a minute now.

Completely missing the point. If you look at the speed a company rolls out new products/features, it should be obvious that "interesting ideas" especially good ones are infrequent and rare. No offense, "using Rust to address a performance problem" is by no means novel or interesting. That is just another person's CRUD.

Using Rust is actually the most boring part of the problem. It would be almost impossible to solve for anyone without certain level of domain expertise.

Re: Is AI causing a repeat of frontend’s lost decade?

#343

We're in the software industry. The whole point of that industry is automating things that are very repetitive. Frontend projects are very repetitive. And now AI is doing that for us. Fantastic, fees up a lot of time to build more interesting things. De-skilling for skills that just aren't that relevant anymore because we've solved the problem (with AI or otherwise) has been a constant in our industry ever since comp…

The point of software is to encode human will into machine communicable state. The entire complaint here is that automating this risks that was is encoded is not what you want.

  > The entire complaint here is that automating this risks that was is encoded is not what you want.
this is the biggest issue to me; even if its code-generation was one-shot "perfect" (and beautiful) every time, people are gonna be less and less sweating the details and start throwing more mud at the wall to see what sticks instead of trying to understand their customer

n=1 but i see this first hand all the time now, people dont even read the generated requirements/specs cause they are too long but it looks kinda ok so "lets have at it" smh

Re: Is AI causing a repeat of frontend’s lost decade?

#344
post #20

The part on the Bauhaus movement is weird, and I'm not sure I agree about how the author thinks about users. >What did previous generations of craftspeople do when everyday goods and buildings suddenly could be mass-produced by industrial processes? One reaction was to copy the style of old, and make the industry crank out widgets and buildings that at least looked like they were handcrafted. Is this a reaction by cr…

IMHO Bauhaus was about design for functionalism and 'getting the job done' efficiently. When viewed in this sense, a Bauhaus frontend might be gopher, an old Nokia phone, or the unix command line. A modern tent is arguably the evolution of the Bauhaus spirit applied to structure. Tents do suck in comfort compared to pre-Bauhaus European buildings, but if you're going to carry a building to the top of a mountain, they…

>Bauhaus was about design for functionalism and 'getting the job done' efficiently.

I don't think it was true at first. From what I understand it was mostly about ideology first.

Re: Is AI causing a repeat of frontend’s lost decade?

#346
I supervise the contributions that juniors make to our codebase. To do this effectively, I use three tools:

1. Scoping. I give juniors projects that are big enough to be valuable, but not so big that they get lost.

2. Instruction. I give juniors frequent, bite-sized lessons related to their tasks. In this, I invest in their skills.

3. Linting. Anything that could be considered a “nit” in a code review is relegated to machine lints. For example, I will never talk about formatting in a code review. That is solved by tooling.

This article makes me wonder if there’s some sort of machine-readable lint for costly abstraction? In a TS project, is there some way to say, “the shadow DOM under this component is too deep.” Or “this object’s inheritance tree is too long.”

Or for zero/cost abstraction languages, is it feasible/productive to lint “this packages dependency tree is too deep”?

How do you identify abstractions that are too leaky to be helpful?

Re: Is AI causing a repeat of frontend’s lost decade?

#347
post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And everything we know about these companies points to unsustainability, before we even get to very high impact content lawsuits which haven't even been settled. Let alone lots of data sets being pulled out of public view and being moved to anti LLM licenses (with explicit licensing for training). We will see how this shakes out in the coming years, as Anthropic, OpenAI & co file for IPO or run out of private funding…

You think this train is going to stop because of a lawsuit? And again, if all data was officially off limits for these companies, it wouldn't matter. They have code traces from their users which is arguably much better, they can license code (you'd be surprised to know that these companies are not just stealing everyones data they are paying for it), and they can create data via paying people to do it. And yes, we wi…

I've read probably hundreds of historical books at this point and the only thing most historians agree on is:

Nothing was set in stone. The way many historical things happened the way they did was due to accident, sheer chance.

> And yes, we will see how it shakes out, Anthropic or OpenAI may collapse just as netscape did, but I hope your implication is not "AI in general will be extinguished like the blockchain" or something

I think the current LLM economy will collapse, leaving behind a few survivors. There will be widespread adoption of cheap OSS LLMs and of more limited, economically viable functionality provided by people with deep pockets like Google. As LLM economics start making more sense, LLMs will be everywhere, once the hardware becomes cheaper and more available.

Regarding lawsuits, do you think Disney & co will take this lying down? The freaking DMCA - an American law - is enforced >. It will take a long time but LLMs will be domesticated.

Re: Is AI causing a repeat of frontend’s lost decade?

#348

I'm sure I'm not alone in feeling the "deep expertise" OP laments was actually deeply inconvenient to many people. I understand that there's a good living to be made from knowing browser quirks, hand-rolling accessible components, mastering CSS specificity, but this is largely accidental complexity. More people building things is straightforwardly good, and if some of those things are slower or less accessible, that'…

> More people building things is straightforwardly good

It most definitely is not.

Re: Is AI causing a repeat of frontend’s lost decade?

#349
post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is for styling documents, but nobody (except for maybe designers trying desperately cling to a job) wants every document to have a bespoke style. I want to use a style created by experts that is consistently shared with every other document across the whole of the internet. CSS is fine as a low-level primitive for those experts, but it is not the mechanism the rest of us should be using. However, there is nothing…

People do want bespoke style (think booklets) and there’s a load of templates (and frameworks) on the internet if you want a standard set of components. The web as a platform was built for documents, and when we try to twist it to do applications, the crack appears. It’s just the wrong tool for the job. Javascript is used for the Gnome shell and it’s doing a fine job there. And if you paired javascript to something l…

> (think booklets)

That's what PDF is for. CSS is for documents, but namely documents for screens, and on screens you want consistency with all the things on that same screen.

> there’s a load of templates (and frameworks) on the internet if you want a standard set of components.

But not a great way to use them. You can make anything work when you have low-level primitives, so it is not a case that it cannot be done, but that's missing the forest for the trees. You can also program a computer by flipping toggle switches, yet we developed better tools (e.g. programming languages) because sometimes its nice to have more comfortable abstractions.

Re: Is AI causing a repeat of frontend’s lost decade?

#350
post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think this train is going to stop because of a lawsuit? And again, if all data was officially off limits for these companies, it wouldn't matter. They have code traces from their users which is arguably much better, they can license code (you'd be surprised to know that these companies are not just stealing everyones data they are paying for it), and they can create data via paying people to do it. And yes, we wi…

I've read probably hundreds of historical books at this point and the only thing most historians agree on is: Nothing was set in stone. The way many historical things happened the way they did was due to accident, sheer chance. > And yes, we will see how it shakes out, Anthropic or OpenAI may collapse just as netscape did, but I hope your implication is not "AI in general will be extinguished like the blockchain" or…

> Nothing was set in stone. The way many historical things happened the way they did was due to accident, sheer chance.

I agree with you on a technical level and even in a non-cynical "humanity really can rally and change things that seem insurmountable" but you have read way more history than I have. All I know is you have such a frantic geopolitical aspect to this, and such a staggering amount of funding and addressable market, which means unlike blockchain this is both powered by business _and_ government (no government would give up control of the money supply, shocking to me that people believe this), that I see zero path to winding anything down.

> I think the current LLM economy will collapse, leaving behind a few survivors. There will be widespread adoption of cheap OSS LLMs and of more limited, economically viable functionality provided by people with deep pockets like Google. As LLM economics start making more sense, LLMs will be everywhere, once the hardware becomes cheaper and more available.

Cheap OSS LLMs are used everywhere, all the time. They are great, and with subsidies from say China, they could even be competitive with frontier models, but that model of the world requires this mysterious OSS development running at a big big loss. It takes almost a billion dollars to train a frontier model. For many many cases, you do not need frontier model performance. When I do say video captioning, I use small OSS VL models.

Is your theory predicated on OSS models filling some sort of performance gap between the frontier? Or a compromise for less spend at a lower performance? What to you doesn't make sense about LLM economics? Like, LLM's are everywhere. If you think "oh people will just settle for slightly less performance for cheaper" that should have already played out, we've had the same dynamics at every scale: frontier performance is expensive, but then that same performance will cost roughly 10x less in 1 years time. But you don't see people stopping at like GPT-4 and not adopting the frontier models of today.

I think you're right about the value of OSS LLMs but I don't see what would change the calculus to make frontier models somehow less important. It's like in the 90's when we were like "1 GIGABYTE OF RAM? how will that ever be necessary!?!?" and sure, you don't need 1 GB of ram for everything! We have embedded systems. But it's not like there isn't a booming market for >> 1 GB memory modules.

> Regarding lawsuits, do you think Disney & co will take this lying down? The freaking DMCA - an American law - is enforced >. It will take a long time but LLMs will be domesticated.

Not saying lawsuits will be fruitless, I'm sure they will chip something off of the industry, but by now it just won't matter. We're talking about trillions in spend, multiple countries, a government that sees this as a non-negotiable game to win from a geopolitical and military standpoint, and our government knows that they can't execute this themselves despite what I imagine is their distaste for Silicon Valley tech CEOs and their grandstanding. Maybe a lawsuit kneecaps someone, which would be huge, but that doesn't matter for AI generally. Maybe a lawsuit restricts data use, that's fine, these companies have deep pockets for licensing and commissioning datasets; they have opt-in-by-default user flywheels.

Post reply on HN