Live data from Hacker News

My AI skeptic friends are all nuts

fly.io

471–480 of 1001 posts

Re: My AI skeptic friends are all nuts

#471

I suspect a large proportion of claims made for productivity increases are skewed by the fact that the speed at which code is produced by AI makes you _feel_ productive, but these gains are largely replaced by the effort to understand, refactor, review and clean up the code. The high that you get when something "works" tends to stick more in your memory than the time when you had to spend a day cleaning up dead code,…

Just a data point:

I think it has a lot to do with the type of work you are doing. I am a couple of years into a very small startup that has some actual technology built (as opposed to a really simple CRUD app or something).

When I am working on the front-end where things are pretty simple AI is a huge speed up. What it does VERY well it latch on to patterns and then apply those patterns to other things. If it has a couple of examples you can point it to and say "ok build that but over here" the newest revisions of Claude and Gemini are perfectly capable of building the whole thing end to end. Because it's a fairly repetitive task I don't have to spend much time untangling it. I can review it and pattern match against things that don't look right and then dive into those.

For a real example, I needed a page for a user to manually add a vendor in our platform. A simple prompt asking Claude to add a button to the page sent into a mode where it added the button, built the backend handler, added the security checks, defined a form, built another handler to handle the submitted data, and added it to the database. It even wrote the ACL correctly. The errors it introduced were largely around using vanilla HTML in place of our standard components and some small issues with how it attempted to write to the DB using our DB library. This saved me a couple of hours of typing.

Additionally if I need to refactor something AI is a godsend. Just today an underlying query builder completely changed its API and broke..everything. Once I identified how I wanted to handle the changes and wrote some utilities I was able to have Claude just find everything everywhere and make those same changes. It did it with like 90% accuracy. Once again that saved me a couple of hours.

Where it fails, usually spectacularly, is when we get to the stuff that is new or really complex. If it doesn't have patterns to latch onto it tries to invent them itself and the code is garbage. Rarely does it work. Attempting to vibe code it with increasingly more pointed prompts will often result in compiling code but almost never will it do the thing I actually wanted.

In these contexts it's usefulness is mostly things like "write a sql query to do X" which occasionally surfaces a technique I hadn't thought about.

So my experience is pretty mixed. I am definitely saving time. Most of it is typing time not thinking time. Which is like 1/3 of my average day. If I had to guess I am somewhere in the neighborhood of 30-40% faster today than I was in 2019. Notably that speed up has allowed me to really stretch this funding round as we are well past the phase where we would have typically hired people in my past companies. Usually someone relatively mid-level to take over those repetitive tasks.

Instead it's just me and a non-technical founder going along super quickly. We will likely be at a seed round before anyone new comes in.

Re: My AI skeptic friends are all nuts

#472

I like Thomas, but I find his arguments include the same fundamental mistake I see made elsewhere. He acknowledged that the tools need an expert to use properly, and as he illustrated, he refined his expertise over many years. He is of the first and last generation of experienced programmers who learned without LLM assistance. How is someone just coming out of school going to get the encouragement and space to indepe…

>How is someone just coming out of school going to get the encouragement and space to independently develop the experience they need to break out of the "vibe coding" phase?

Dunno. Money is probably going to be a huge incentive.

I see the same argument everywhere. Like animators getting their start tweening other peoples content. AI is great at tweening and likely to replace farms of juniors. But companies will need seniors to direct animation, so they will either have to pay a lot of money to find them or pay a lot of money to train them.

Re: My AI skeptic friends are all nuts

#473

I suspect a large proportion of claims made for productivity increases are skewed by the fact that the speed at which code is produced by AI makes you _feel_ productive, but these gains are largely replaced by the effort to understand, refactor, review and clean up the code. The high that you get when something "works" tends to stick more in your memory than the time when you had to spend a day cleaning up dead code,…

[deleted]

Re: My AI skeptic friends are all nuts

#474

I like Thomas, but I find his arguments include the same fundamental mistake I see made elsewhere. He acknowledged that the tools need an expert to use properly, and as he illustrated, he refined his expertise over many years. He is of the first and last generation of experienced programmers who learned without LLM assistance. How is someone just coming out of school going to get the encouragement and space to indepe…

> How is someone just coming out of school going to get the encouragement and space to independently develop the experience they need to break out of the "vibe coding" phase?

LLM's are so-so coders but incredible teachers. Today's students get the benefit of asking copying and pasting a piece of code into an LLM and asking, "How does this work?"

There's a lot of young people that will use LLM's to be lazy. There's also a lot that will use them to feed their intellectual curiosity.

Re: My AI skeptic friends are all nuts

#475
post #467

To quote an excellent article from last week: > The AI has suggested a solution, but the added code is arguably useless or wrong. There is a huge decision space to consider, but the AI tool has picked one set of decisions, without any rationale for this decision. > [...] > Programming is about lots of decisions, large and small. Architecture decisions. Data validation decisions. Button color decisions. > Some decisio…

No, what's happening here is that you're using a different definition of "boilerplate" than the adopters are using. To you, "boilerplate" is literally a chunk of code you copy and paste to repeatedly solve a problem (btw: I flip my shit when people do this on codebases I work on). To them, "boilerplate" represents a common set of rote solutions to isomorphic problems. The actual lines of code might be quite different, but the approach is the same. That's not necessarily something you can copy-paste.

Coming at this from a computer-science or PLT perspective, this idea of an "abstract, repeatable meta-boilerplate" is exactly the payoff we expect from language features like strong type systems. Part of the point of rigorous languages is to create these kinds of patterns. You had total expressiveness back in assembly language! Repeatable rigor is most of the point of modern languages.

Re: My AI skeptic friends are all nuts

#476
post #21

A writing for the ages. I've found most of the LLM skeptics are either being hypocritical or just being gate-keepy (we dont want everyone to write code)

I find the AI proponents have an insane level of egocentrism

They cannot possibly imagine someone has a different use case where the AI didn't work

"I crank out shitty webapps all day, therefore every single other dev does. Everyone obviously has the same use case as me because I am the center of the universe"

Re: My AI skeptic friends are all nuts

#477
> You’ve always been responsible for what you merge to main.

I've never merged anything with an unclear copyright to main, let alone if I positively suspected that it had been plagiarized.

> Cut me a little slack as I ask you to shove this concern up your ass. No profession has demonstrated more contempt for intellectual property.

Every place I've been employed was nearly paranoid about copyright, with rules in place about never copying and pasting anything copyrighted into the company code base.

All the major open source distros and projects, likewise.

There are some bad apples out there, like, oh, Sam Altman, who wants massive plagiarism to be fair use.

So, au contraire, you can shove your contemptuous blog up your ass, buddy.

Re: My AI skeptic friends are all nuts

#478

Curious how he reconciles this: > If you build something with an LLM that people will depend on, read the code. In fact, you’ll probably do more than that. You’ll spend 5-10 minutes knocking it back into your own style. with Joel Spolsky's fundamental maxim: > It’s harder to read code than to write it. https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/04/06/things-you-should-...

The major difference is that in the type of reading Joel Splosky is talking about, you are coming in not knowing the code's intent. It was written by one or more other people at some point in the past, likely with many iterative changes over a period of time. Figuring out the intent in this case is 90%+ of the work. With LLM generated code, you know the intent. You just told the assistant exactly what your intent was. It's much, much easier to read code that you already know the intent of.
Post reply on HN