Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AI is stifling new tech adoption?

vale.rocks

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 442 posts

Re: AI is stifling new tech adoption?

#371

Post by camdenreslink »

jeremyjh wrote: post #321
milesvp wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Strong disagree here. I've been trying to learn Zig, and I'm thwarted enough by chatgpt giving me outdated information on Zig's unstable API that if I didn't have a strong incentive to learn it for it's cross compiler, I'd likely turn my efforts towards another language. This effect can greatly alter the adoption curve of a new tech, which can leave it dying on the vine. You're not wrong though, in that Stack Overflo…

Imagine a world without ChatGPT or Stack Overflow. Is it easier to build your Zig project in that world?

No, but the relative ease of picking up Zig is lower compared to another language that has a lot of training data (maybe golang could be used for similar projects) in the LLM world. So users might be less reluctant to pick up Zig at all now.

That could slow down adoption of new languages, frameworks, libraries etc.

Re: AI is stifling new tech adoption?

#372

Post by kristianp »

> Claude’s artifacts feature

The article mentions that Claude’s artifacts feature is opinionated about using react and will even refuse, to code for Svelte Runes. It's hard to get it to use plain JavaScript because react is in the system prompt for artefacts. Poor prompt engineering in claude.

Re: AI is stifling new tech adoption?

#373

Post by blt »

lasagnagram wrote: post #354

No, new tech is just 100% extractive, wealth-generating garbage, and people are sick and tired of it. Come up with something new that isn't designed to vacuum up your data and your paycheck, and then maybe people will be more enthusiastic about it.

You didn't read the article

Re: AI is stifling new tech adoption?

#374

Post by femiagbabiaka »

lasagnagram wrote: post #353
milesvp wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Strong disagree here. I've been trying to learn Zig, and I'm thwarted enough by chatgpt giving me outdated information on Zig's unstable API that if I didn't have a strong incentive to learn it for it's cross compiler, I'd likely turn my efforts towards another language. This effect can greatly alter the adoption curve of a new tech, which can leave it dying on the vine. You're not wrong though, in that Stack Overflo…

Have you considered learning by reading documentation and tutorials, instead of asking the lie generator? I mean, how do you think people learned things before 2023?

Yeah.. it's one thing to say "it would be nice if I could query a LLM about this topic" and another to say "I refuse to study this topic unless I can query a LLM."

To be frank, the latter does not sound like the mindset of an effective engineer -- in my experience effective engineers are curious, voracious in pursuit of knowledge.

Re: AI is stifling new tech adoption?

#375

Post by s__s »

milesvp wrote: post #300
crazygringo wrote: post #252

No, AI isn't. Any new tech, or version upgrade, or whatever, takes time for people to become familiar with it. You might as well say "Stack Overflow is stifling new tech adoption" because brand-new stuff doesn't have many Q's and A's yet. But that would be a silly thing to say. I'm not going to adopt a brand-new database regardless of LLM training data cutoff, just because enough people haven't had enough experience…

Strong disagree here. I've been trying to learn Zig, and I'm thwarted enough by chatgpt giving me outdated information on Zig's unstable API that if I didn't have a strong incentive to learn it for it's cross compiler, I'd likely turn my efforts towards another language. This effect can greatly alter the adoption curve of a new tech, which can leave it dying on the vine. You're not wrong though, in that Stack Overflo…

I think it will become standard to provide up to date references specifically tailored for LLMS.

For example: https://svelte.dev/docs/llms

Re: AI is stifling new tech adoption?

#376

Post by hhhAndrew »

CerebralCerb wrote: post #297
benve wrote: post #196

I think this is true because I myself said to myself: "it is useless for me to create a library or abstraction for the developers of my project, much better to use everything verbose using the most popular libraries on the web". Until yesterday having an abstraction (or a better library/framework) could be very convenient to save time in writing a lot of code. Today if the code is mostly generated there is no need to…

Only in one sense. As code is now cheaper, abstractions meant to decrease code quantity have decreased in value. But abstractions meant to organize logic to make it easier to comprehend retains its value.

I like this take.

Previously there was a tension between easy-to-write (helper functions to group together oft-repeated lines of code, etc) vs easy to read (where often modest repetition is fine and is clearer). I felt this tension a lot in tests where the future reader is very happy with explicit lines of code setting things up, whereas the test author is bored and writes layers of helper functions to speed their work up.

But for LLMs, it seems readability of code pretty much equals its writability?

To make code more authorable by LLM, we approximately just need to make it more readable in the traditional sense (code comments, actual abstractions not just code-saving helper functions, etc).

Re: AI is stifling new tech adoption?

#377

Post by meatmanek »

rhet0rica wrote: post #313
jimmaswell wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

QWERTY is a poor example. The keyboard layout is not the bottleneck for anyone who does not participate in olympic typing competitions. DVORAK is just as arbitrary as QWERTY to everyone else including professionals, and there's value in backwards compatibility e.g. old keyboards don't become e-waste.

It sounds like you're thinking purely about the speed of a skilled typist. Alternative keyboard layouts offer a tangible ergonomic benefit even at lower WPM counts, and can have a lower hunt-and-peck time for novices by clustering frequently-used letters together. (This last effect is particularly pronounced on small touch screens, where the seek time is non-trivial and the buttons are much too close together for any…

I expect dvorak would actually be pretty bad for a phone screen keyboard. All your most common letters are right next to each other, making autocorrect/swipe type's job harder because adjacent letter pairs are much more likely to be interchangeable. (Especially since vowels are on the left side and consonants on the right.)

Re: AI is stifling new tech adoption?

#379

Post by ra0x3 »

matsemann wrote: post #86

I actually asked this a while back, but got little response: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40263033 > Ask HN: Will LLMs hurt adoption of new frameworks and technology? > If I ask some LLM/GPT a react question I get good responses. If I ask it about a framework released after the training data was obtained, it will either not know or hallucinate. Or if it's a lesser known framework the quality will be worse tha…

+1 ChatGPT 4o still does not understand that React's ChakraUI is now on version 3 - which is incompatible with it's ChakraUI version 2 training data :')

Re: AI is stifling new tech adoption?

#380

Post by cpursley »

milesvp wrote: post #300
crazygringo wrote: post #252

No, AI isn't. Any new tech, or version upgrade, or whatever, takes time for people to become familiar with it. You might as well say "Stack Overflow is stifling new tech adoption" because brand-new stuff doesn't have many Q's and A's yet. But that would be a silly thing to say. I'm not going to adopt a brand-new database regardless of LLM training data cutoff, just because enough people haven't had enough experience…

Strong disagree here. I've been trying to learn Zig, and I'm thwarted enough by chatgpt giving me outdated information on Zig's unstable API that if I didn't have a strong incentive to learn it for it's cross compiler, I'd likely turn my efforts towards another language. This effect can greatly alter the adoption curve of a new tech, which can leave it dying on the vine. You're not wrong though, in that Stack Overflo…

That's because you're using ChatGPT instead of Claude.
Post reply on HN