Live data from Hacker News

We mourn our craft

nolanlawson.com

411–420 of 918 posts

Re: We mourn our craft

#411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Now it's always available. And often incorrect! (and occasionally refuses to answer)

Sure, but it's easy to check if it's incorrect and try again.

When you use it to lookup a single word, yeah, but people here use it to lookup thousand words at once and then can't check it all.

Re: We mourn our craft

#412
post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> golden age of computing I feel like we've reached the worst age of computing. Where our platforms are controlled by power hungry megacorporations and our software is over-engineered garbage. The same company that develops our browsers and our web standards is also actively destroying the internet with AI scrapers. Hobbyists lost the internet to companies and all software got worse for it. Our most popular desktop o…

Yes, this is where it's at for me. LLM's are cool and I can see them as progress, but I really dislike that they're controlled by huge corporations and cost a significant amount of money to use.

Use local OSS models then? They aren’t as good and you need beefy hardware (either Apple silicon or nvidia GPUs). But they are totally workable, and you avoid your dislikes directly.

Re: We mourn our craft

#413
post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We're on the precipice of something incredible. Total dependence on a service?

The quality of local models has increased significantly since this time last year. As have the options for running larger local models.

These takes are terrible.

1. It costs 100k in hardware to run Kimi 2.5 with a single session at decent tok p/s and its still not capable for anything serious.

2. I want whatever you're smoking if you think anyone is going to spend billions training models capable of outcompeting them are affordable to run and then open source them.

Re: We mourn our craft

#414
post #335
post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're underestimating what AI can do in the coding space. It is an extreme paradigm shift. It's not like "we wrote C, but now we switch to C++, so now we think in objects and templates". It's closer to the shift from assembly to a higher level language. Your goal is still the same. But suddenly you're working in a completely newer level of abstraction where a lot of the manual work that used to be your main…

> But suddenly you're working in a completely newer level of abstraction where a lot of the manual work that used to be your main concern is suddenly automated away. It's remarkable that people who think like this don't have the foresight to see that this technology is not a higher level of abstraction, but a replacement of human intellect. You may be working with it today, but whatever you're doing will eventually b…

I agree with this. At a higher level of abstraction, you’re still doing the fundamental problem solving. Low-level machine language or high-level Java, C++ or even Python, the fundamental algorithm design is still entirely done by the programmer. LLMs aren’t being used to just write the code unless the user is directing how each line or at least each function is being written, often times you can just describe the problem and it solves it most of the way if not entirely. Only for really long and complex tasks do the better models really require hand-holding and they are improving on that end rapidly.

That’s not a higher level of abstraction, it’s having someone do the work for you while doing less and less of the thinking as well. Someone might resist that urge and consistently guide the model closely but that’s probably not what the collective range of SWEs who use these models are doing and rapidly the ease of using these models and our natural reluctance to take on mental stress is likely to make sure that eventually everyone lets LLMs do most or all of the thinking for them. If things really go in that direction and spread, I foresee a collective dumbing down of the general population.

Re: We mourn our craft

#415
post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> golden age of computing I feel like we've reached the worst age of computing. Where our platforms are controlled by power hungry megacorporations and our software is over-engineered garbage. The same company that develops our browsers and our web standards is also actively destroying the internet with AI scrapers. Hobbyists lost the internet to companies and all software got worse for it. Our most popular desktop o…

Yes, this is where it's at for me. LLM's are cool and I can see them as progress, but I really dislike that they're controlled by huge corporations and cost a significant amount of money to use.

> they're controlled by huge corporations and cost a significant amount of money to use.

is there anything you use that isn't? like laptop on which you work, software that you use to browse the internet, read the email... I've heard similar comment like yours before and I am not sure I understand it given everything else - why does this matter for LLMs and not the phone you use etc etc?

Re: We mourn our craft

#416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have what I've dreamed of for years: the reverse dictionary. Put in a word and see what it means? That's been easy for at least a century. Have a meaning in mind and get the word? The only way to get this before was to read a ton of books and be knowledgable or talk to someone who was. Now it's always available.

> Now it's always available. And often incorrect! (and occasionally refuses to answer)

Is it? I’ve seen AI hallucinations, but they seem to be increasingly rare these days.

Much of the AI antipathy reminds me of Wikipedia in the early-mid 2000s. I remember feeling amazed with it, but also remember a lot of ranting by skeptics about how anyone could put anything on there, and therefore it was unreliable, not to be used, and doomed to fail.

20 years later and everyone understands that Wikipedia may have its shortcomings, and yet it is still the most impressive, useful advancement in human knowledge transfer in a generation.

Re: We mourn our craft

#417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The golden age for me is any period where you have the fully documented systems. Hardware that ships with documentation about what instructions it supports. With example code. Like my 8-bit micros did. And software that’s open and can be modified. Instead what we have is: - AI which are little black boxes and beyond our ability to fully reason. - perpetual subscription services for the same software we used to “own”.…

Have you tried using GenAI to write documentation? You can literally point it to a folder and say, analyze everything in this folder and write a document about it. And it will do it. It's more thorough than anything a human could do, especially in the time frame we're talking about. If GenAI could only write documentation it would still be a game changer.

But it write mostly useless documentation Which take time to read and decipher.

And worse, if you are using it for public documentation, sometimes it hallucinate endpoints (i don't want to say too much here, but it happened recently to a quite used B2B SaaS).

Re: We mourn our craft

#418
post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Models do not need to hold the whole code base in memory, and neither do you. You both search for what you need. Models can already memorize more than you !

> Models do not need to hold the whole code base in memory, and neither do you Humans rewire their mind to optimize it for the codebase, that is why new programmers takes a while to get up to speed in the codebase. LLM doesn't do that and until they do they need the entire thing in context. And the reason we can't do that today is that there isn't enough data in a single codebase to train an LLM to be smart about it,…

Getting up to speed is a human problem. Computers are so fast they can 'get up to speed' from scratch for every session, and we help them with AGENTS files and newer things like memories; e.g., https://code.claude.com/docs/en/memory

It is not perfect yet but the tooling here is improving. I do not see a ceiling here. LSPs + memory solve this problem. I run into issues but this is not a big one for me.

Re: We mourn our craft

#419
post #151

To the people who are against AI programming, honest question: why do you not program in assembly? Can you really say "you" "programmed" anything at all if a compiler wrote your binaries? This is a 100% honest question. Because whatever your justification to this is, it can probably be used for AI programmers using temperature 0.0 as well, just one abstraction level higher. I'm 100% honestly looking forward to findin…

  > why do you not program in assembly?
There's a balance of levels of abstraction. Abstraction is a great thing. Abstraction can make your programs faster, more flexible, and more easy to understand. But abstraction can also make your programs slower, more brittle, and incomprehensible.

The point of code is to write specification. That is what code is. The whole reason we use a pedantic and somewhat cryptic schema is that natural language is too abstract. This is the exact reason we created math. It really is even the same reason we created things like "legalese".

Seriously, just try a simple exercise and be adversarial to yourself. Describe how to do something and try to find loopholes. Malicious compliance. It's hard, to defend and writing that spec becomes extremely verbose, right? Doesn't this actually start to become easier by using coding techniques? Strong definitions? Have we not all forgotten the old saying "a computer does exactly what you tell it to, not what you intend to tell it to do"? Vibe coding only adds a level of abstraction to that. It becomes "a computer does what it 'thinks' you are telling it to do, not what you intend to tell it to do". Be honest with yourself, which paradigm is easier to debug?

Natural language is awesome because the abstraction really compresses concepts, but it requires inference of the listener. It requires you to determine what the speaker intends to say rather than what the speaker actually says.

Without that you'd have to be pedantic to even describe something as mundane as making a sandwich[1]. But inference also leads to misunderstandings and frankly, that is a major factor of why we talk past one another when talking on large global communication systems. Have you never experienced culture shock? Never experienced where someone misinterprets you and you realize that their interpretation was entirely reasonable?[2] Doesn't this knowledge also help resolve misunderstandings as you take a step back and recheck assumptions about these inferences?

  > using temperature 0.0
Because, as you should be able to infer from everything I've said above, the problem isn't actually about randomness in the system. Making the system deterministic only has one realistic outcome: a programming language. You're still left with the computer doing what you tell it to do, but have made this more abstract. You've only turned it into the PB&J problem[1] and frankly, I'd rather write code than instructions like those kids are. Compared to the natural language the kids are using, code is more concise, easier to understand, more robust, and more flexible.

I really think Dijkstra explains things well[0]. (I really do encourage reading the entire thing. It is short and worth the 2 minutes. His remark at the end is especially relevant in our modern world where it is so easy to misunderstand one another...)

  The virtue of formal texts is that their manipulations, in order to be legitimate, need to satisfy only a few simple rules; they are, when you come to think of it, an amazingly effective tool for ruling out all sorts of nonsense that, when we use our native tongues, are almost impossible to avoid.

  Instead of regarding the obligation to use formal symbols as a burden, we should regard the convenience of using them as a privilege: thanks to them, school children can learn to do what in earlier days only genius could achieve. 
[0] https://www.cs.utexas.edu/~EWD/transcriptions/EWD06xx/EWD667...

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FN2RM-CHkuI

[2] Has this happened to you and you've been too stubborn to realize the interpretation was reasonable?

Re: We mourn our craft

#420

I started programming over 40 years ago because it felt like computers were magic. They feel more magic today than ever before. We're literally living in the 1980s fantasy where you could talk to your computer and it had a personality. I can't believe it's actually happening, and I've never had more fun computing. I can't empathize with the complaint that we've "lost something" at all. We're on the precipice of somet…

Good for you. But there are already so, so many posts and threads celebrating all of this. Everyone is different. Some of us enjoy the activity of programming by hand. This thread is for those us, to mourn.

You're still allowed to program by hand. Even in assembly language if you like.
Post reply on HN