Live data from Hacker News

I miss thinking hard

jernesto.com

381–390 of 764 posts

Re: I miss thinking hard

#381
I'm thinking much more than ever, now that the coding agent is building for me.

I strongly experience that coding agents are helping me think about stuff I wasn't able to think through before.

I very much have both of these builder and thinker personas inside me, and I just am not getting this experience with "lack of thinking" that I'm seeing so many other people write about. I have it exactly the other way around, even if I'm a similar arch type of person. I'm spending less time building and more time thinking than ever.

Re: I miss thinking hard

#382
post #182
post #162

I will never not be upset at my fellow engineers for selling out the ONE thing that made us valuable and respected in the marketplace and trying to destroy software engineering as a career because "Claude Code go brrrrrr" basically. It's like we had the means for production and more or less collectively decided "You know what? Actually, the bourgeoisie can have it, sure."

The personification of the quote “your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should” I feel the existential problem for a world that follows the religion of science and technology to its extreme, is that most people in STEM have no foundation in humanities, so ethical and philosophical concerns never pass through their mind. We have signed a pact with the…

[deleted]

Re: I miss thinking hard

#383
post #32

This March 2025 post from Aral Balkan stuck with me: https://mastodon.ar.al/@aral/114160190826192080 "Coding is like taking a lump of clay and slowly working it into the thing you want it to become. It is this process, and your intimacy with the medium and the materials you’re shaping, that teaches you about what you’re making – its qualities, tolerances, and limits – even as you make it. You know the least about wha…

This is beautifully written, but as a point against agentic AI coding, I just don't really get it.

It seems to assume that vibe coding or like whatever you call the Gas Town model of programming is the only option, but you don't have to do that. You don't have to specify upfront what you want and then never change or develop that as you go through the process of building it, and you don't have to accept whatever the AI gives you on the other end as final.

You can explore the affordances of the technologies you're using, modify your design and vision for what you're building as you go; if anything, I've found AI coding mix far easier to change and evolve my direction because it can update all the various parts of the code that need to be updated when I want to change direction as well as keeping the tests and specification and documentation in sync, easily and quickly.

You also don't need to take the final product as a given, a "simulacrum delivered from a vending machine": build, and then once you've gotten something working, look at it and decide that it's not really what you want, and then continue to iterate and change and develop it. Again, with AI coding, I've found this easier than ever because it's easier to iterate on things. The process is a bit faster for not having to move the text around and looking up API documentation myself, even though I'm directly dictating the architecture and organization and algorithms and even where code should go most of the time.

And with the method I'm describing, where you're in the code just as much as the AI is, just using it to do the text/API/code munging, you can even let the affordances of not just the technologies, but the source code and programming language itself effect how you do this: if you care about the code quality and clarity and organization of the code that the AI is generating, you'll see when it's trying to brute force its way past technical limitations and instead redirect it to follow the grain. It just becomes easier and more fluid to do that.

If anything, AI coding in general makes it easier to have a conversation with the machine and its affordances and your design vision and so on, then before because it becomes easier to update everything and move everything around as your ideas change.

And nothing about it means that you need to be ignorant of what's going on; ostensibly you're reviewing literally every line of code it creates and deciding what libraries and languages as well as the architecture, organization and algorithms it's using. You are aren't you? So you should know everything you need to know. In fact, I've learned several libraries and a language just from watching it work, enough that I can work with them without looking anything up, even new syntax and constructs that would have been very unfamiliar prior on my manual coding days.

Re: I miss thinking hard

#384
post #182
post #162

I will never not be upset at my fellow engineers for selling out the ONE thing that made us valuable and respected in the marketplace and trying to destroy software engineering as a career because "Claude Code go brrrrrr" basically. It's like we had the means for production and more or less collectively decided "You know what? Actually, the bourgeoisie can have it, sure."

The personification of the quote “your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should” I feel the existential problem for a world that follows the religion of science and technology to its extreme, is that most people in STEM have no foundation in humanities, so ethical and philosophical concerns never pass through their mind. We have signed a pact with the…

Yeah, lawyers, politicians and MBA types all usually have solid foundation in humanities. Not exactly known for concerning themselves with ethics or philosophy though.

Re: I miss thinking hard

#385
post #32

This March 2025 post from Aral Balkan stuck with me: https://mastodon.ar.al/@aral/114160190826192080 "Coding is like taking a lump of clay and slowly working it into the thing you want it to become. It is this process, and your intimacy with the medium and the materials you’re shaping, that teaches you about what you’re making – its qualities, tolerances, and limits – even as you make it. You know the least about wha…

To me it's all abstraction. I didn't write my own OS. I didn't write my own compiler. I didn't write the standard library. I just use them. I could write them but I'm happy to work on the new thing that uses what's already there. This is no different than many things. I could grow a tree and cut it into wood but I don't. I could buy wood and nails and brackets and make furniture but I don't. I instead just fill my ho…

When I read discussions about this sort of thing, I often find that folks look harder for similarities and patterns but once they succeed here, they ignore the differences. AI in particular is so full of this "pattern matching" style of thinking that the really significance of this tech, ie., how absolutely new and different it is, yeah it just sort of goes ignored, or even worse, machines get "pattern matched" into humans and folks argue from that point of view lol witness all the "new musicians" who vibe code disco hits, I'll invariably see the argument that AIs train on existing music just like humans do so whats the big deal?

But these arguments and the OP's article do reinforce that AI rots brains. Even my sparing use of googles gemini and my interaction with the bots here have really dinged my ability to do simple math.

Re: I miss thinking hard

#386
I find I think harder with AI programming. It generates the code, but I have to approve the overall design and then approve every single line. I will edit and rearrange the code until it is correct.

But since the AI is generating a lot of code, it is challenging me. It also allows me to tackle problems in unfamiliar areas. I need to properly understand the solutions, which again is challenging. I know that if I don't understand exactly what the code is doing and have confidence in the design and reliability, it will come back and bite me when I release it into the wild. A lesson learnt the hard way during many decades of programming.

Re: I miss thinking hard

#388
post #32

This March 2025 post from Aral Balkan stuck with me: https://mastodon.ar.al/@aral/114160190826192080 "Coding is like taking a lump of clay and slowly working it into the thing you want it to become. It is this process, and your intimacy with the medium and the materials you’re shaping, that teaches you about what you’re making – its qualities, tolerances, and limits – even as you make it. You know the least about wha…

But you can move a layer up. Instead of pouring all of your efforts into making one single static object with no moving parts, you can simply specify the individual parts, have the machine make them for you, and pour your heart and soul into making a machine that is composed of thousands of parts, that you could never hope to make if you had to craft each one by hand from clay. We used to have a way to do this before…

It's more like the chess.com vs lichess example in my mind. On the one hand you have a big org, dozens of devs, on the other you have one guy doing a better job.

It's amazing what one competent developer can do, and it's amazing how little a hundred devs end up actually doing when weighed down by beaurocracy. And lets not pretend even half of them qualify as competent, not to mention they probably don't care either. They get to work and have a 45 min coffee break, move some stuff around in the Kanban board, have another coffee break, then lunch, then foosball etc. Ad when they actually write some code it's ass.

And sure, for those guys maybe LLMs represent a huge productivity boost. For me it's usually faster to do the work myself than to coax the bot into creating something acceptable.

Re: I miss thinking hard

#389
post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not yet, anyway; I do trust LLMs for writing snippets or features at this point, but I don't trust them for setting up new applications, technology choices, architectures, etc. The other day people were talking about metrics, the amount of lines of code people vs LLMs could output in any given time, or the lines of code in an LLM assisted application - using LOC as a metric for productivity. But would an LLM ever sug…

I was creating a Jira/bb wrapper with node recently and Claude actually used plenty of libraries to solve some tasks.

Same with gpt, but I felt it was more like "hey, everyone uses that, so why not me" than finding the right tool for the job. Can't say for Claude.

Re: I miss thinking hard

#390
post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an amazing quote - thank you. This is also my argument for why I can't use LLMs for writing (proofreading is OK) - what I write is not produced as a side-effect of thinking through a problem, writing is how I think through a problem.

Counterpoint (more devil's advocate), I'd argue it's better than an LLM writes something (e.g. the solution or thinking through of a problem) than nothing at all. Counterpoint to my own counterpoint, will anyone actually (want to) read it? counterpoint to the third degree, to loop it back around, an LLM might and I'd even argue an LLM is better at reading and ingesting long text (I'm thinking architectural documentat…

I kinda saw this happen in realtime on reddit yesterday. Someone asked for advice on how to deal with a team that was in over their heads shipping slop. The crux of their question was fair, but they used a different LLM to translate their original thoughts from their native language into English. The prompt was "translate this to english for a reddit post" - nothing else.

The LLM adding a bunch of extra formatting to add emphasis and structure to what might have originally been a bit of a ramble, but obviously human written. The comments absolutely lambasted this OP for being a hypocrite complaining about their team using AI, but then seeing little problem with posting what is obviously an AI generated question because the OP didn't deem their English skills good enough to ask the question directly.

I'm not going to pass judgement on this scenario, but I did think the entire encounter was a "fun" anecdote in addition to your comments.

Edit: wrods

Post reply on HN