Live data from Hacker News

My AI skeptic friends are all nuts

fly.io

51–60 of 1001 posts

Re: My AI skeptic friends are all nuts

#51
post #29

So we replace the task of writing tedious boilerplate with the task of reading the AI's tedious boilerplate. Which takes just as long. And leaves you with less understanding. And is more boring.

You are either a very fast producer or a very slow reader. Claude and Gemini are much faster at producing code than I am, and reviewing their code - twice over, even - still takes less time than writing it myself.

Re: My AI skeptic friends are all nuts

#52
> Almost nothing it spits out for me merges without edits. I’m sure there’s a skill to getting a SOTA model to one-shot a feature-plus-merge!

How does this section fit in with the agent section just after? In an agentic model, isn't the merge getting done by either the model or a tool, and the retry-loops on failures would be mostly invisible?

E.g. when using Aider + Gemini Flash 2.5, probably 90% of the changes apply cleanly from my perspective (maybe half actually apply cleanly, the other half after a couple of roundtrips of Aider telling the model that the patch didn't apply). The 10% that only apply partially I usually throw away and redo the prompt, it's really rare that I start merging the code manually.

Re: My AI skeptic friends are all nuts

#53
post #7

I feel like we get one of these articles that addresses valid AI criticisms with poor arguments every week and at this point I’m ready to write a boilerplate response because I already know what they’re going to say. Interns don’t cost 20 bucks a month but training users in the specifics of your org is important. Knowing what is important or pointless comes with understanding the skill set.

There's also the reverse genre: valid criticism of absolutely strawman arguments that nobody makes.

Re: My AI skeptic friends are all nuts

#54

I simply do not get this argument about LLMs writing tedious code or scaffolding. You don't need or want LLMs for that, you want libraries and frameworks. I barely write any scaffolding code, because I use tools that setup the scaffolding for me.

If you're lucky to work in such an environment, more power to you. A lot of people have to deal with React where you need so much glue for basic tasks, and React isn't even the worst offender. Some boilerplate you can't wrap.

Re: My AI skeptic friends are all nuts

#56
A hammer hammers.

It hammers 100% of the time, with no failure.

It requires the same amount of labour from my part but it delivers the same outcome every time.

That is what tools do, they act as an extension and allow you to do things not easily done otherwise.

If the hammer sometimes hammers, sometimes squeaks and sometimes screws then it requires extra labour from my part just to make it do what purpose specific tools do, and that is where frustrations arise.

Make it do one thing excellent and we talk then.

Re: My AI skeptic friends are all nuts

#57

Can someone explain to me what this means? > People coding with LLMs today use agents. Agents get to poke around your codebase on their own. They author files directly. They run tools. They compile code, run tests, and iterate on the results. ... Is this what people are really doing? Who is just turning AI loose to modify things as it sees fit? If I'm not directing the work, how does it even know what to do? I've bee…

> Is this what people are really doing?

Some people are, and some people are not. This is where some of the disconnect is coming from.

> Who is just turning AI loose to modify things as it sees fit?

In the advent of source control, why not? If it does something egregiously wrong, you can throw it away easily and get back to a previous state with ease.

> If I'm not directing the work, how does it even know what to do?

You're directing the work, but at a higher level of abstraction.

Re: My AI skeptic friends are all nuts

#58
I have a very simple counter argument: I've tried it and it's not useful. Maybe it is useful for you. Maybe even the things you're using it for are not trivial or better served by a different tool. That's fine, I don't mind you using a tool far away from my codebase and dependency tree. It has not been useful for me, and it's very unlikely it's ever going to be.

Except that's not the argument people are making. They are arguing it will replace humans. They are arguing it will do research level mathematics. They are arguing this is the start of AGI. So if you want to put your head in the sand and ignore the greater message that is plastered everywhere then perhaps some self reflection is warranted.

Re: My AI skeptic friends are all nuts

#59

tptacek, curious question: what agent / stack do you currently use?

I use Codex CLI for casual stuff, because of the ergonomics of just popping open another terminal tab.

I use Zed as my primary interface to "actually doing project work" LLM stuff, because it front-ends both OpenAI and Google/Gemini models, and because I really like the interface. I still write code in Emacs; Zed is kind of like the Github PR viewer for me.

I'm just starting to use Codex Web for asynchronous agents because I have a friend who swears by queueing up a dozen async prompts every morning and sifting through them in the afternoon. The idea of just brainstorming a bunch of shit --- I can imagine keeping focus and motivation going long enough to just rattle ideas off! --- and then making coffee while it all gets tried, is super appealing to me.

Re: My AI skeptic friends are all nuts

#60

> Often, it will drop you precisely at that golden moment where shit almost works, and development means tweaking code and immediately seeing things work better. That dopamine hit is why I code. Only if you are familiar with the project/code. If not, you were throw into a foreign codebase and have no idea how to tweak it.

And potentially make incredibly risky mistakes while the AI assures you it’s fine.
Post reply on HN