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

Snorting the AGI with Claude Code

kadekillary.work

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 253 posts

Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code

#51

Post by shinycode »

QuercusMax wrote: post #38
lunarboy wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure people (esp engineers) know this. But imagine you're starting a company: would you try to deploy N agents (even if shitty), or take a financial/time/legal/social risk with a new hire. When you consider short-term costs, the math just never works out in favor of real humans.

What about the financial / legal / social risk of your AI agent doing something bad? You're only looking at cost savings, without seeing the potentially major downsides.

To follow up my previous comment, I worked on a project where someone fixed an old bug. This bug became a feature for clients who build their systems around this api endpoint. The consequence is hundreds of thousands of user duplicates with automations attaching new ressources and actions randomly on the duplicates. Massive consequences for the customers. If it were an AI doing the fixing with no human intervention, good luck understanding, cleaning the mess and holding accountable. People seem lightly think that if the agent is doing something bad it’s just a risk to take. But when a codebase with massive amounts of loc and logic is build and no human knows it, how to deal with the consequences on people’s business ? Can’t help but think it’s crappy software with a « Google closed your Gmail account, no one knows why and we can’t do anything about it, sorry ». But instead of a mail account it’s part of your business

Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code

#52

Post by TuringNYC »

godelski wrote: post #18
BoredPositron wrote: post #11

If people would be as patient and inventive to teach junior devs as they are with llms the whole industry would be better of.

A constant reminder: you can't have wizards without having noobs. Every wizard was once a noob. No one is born that way, they were forged. It's in everybody's interest to train them. If they leave, you still benefit from the other companies who trained them, making the cost equal. Though if they leave, there's probably better ways to make them stay that you haven't considered (e.g. have you considered not paying new…

>> A constant reminder: you can't have wizards without having noobs.

Try telling that to companies with quarterly earnings. Very few resist the urge to optimize for the short term.

Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code

#53

Post by CGamesPlay »

Aeolun wrote: post #12
SamPatt wrote: post #3

>Claude code feels more powerful than cursor, but why? One of the reasons seems it's ability to be scripted. At the end of the day, cursor is an editor, while claude code is a swiss army knife (on steroids). Agreed, and I find that I use Claude Code on more than traditional code bases. I run it in my Obsidian vault for all kinds of things. I run it to build local custom keyboard bindings with scripts that publish scr…

The thing is, Claude Code only works if you have the plan. It’s impossible to use it on the API, and it makes me wonder if $100/month is truly enough. I use it all day every day now, and I must be consuming a whole lot more than my $100 is worth.

You use it "all day every day", so it makes sense that you would prefer the plan. It's perfectly economical to use it without a plan, if your usage patterns are different. Here's a tool someone else wrote that can help you decide: https://github.com/ryoppippi/ccusage

Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code

#54

Post by lelanthran »

drewlesueur wrote: post #20
sorcerer-mar wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You pay junior devs way way way more money for the privilege of them being bad. And since they're human, the juniors themselves do not have the patience of an LLM. I really would not want to be a junior dev right now... Very unfair and undesirable situation they've landed in.

I think it would be great to be a junior dev now and be able to learn quickly with llms.

> I think it would be great to be a junior dev now and be able to learn quickly with llms.

I'm not so sure; I get great results (learning) with them because I can nitpick what they give me, attempt to explain how I understand it and I pretty much always preface my prompts with "be critical and show me where I am wrong".

I've seen a junior use it to "learn", which was basically "How do I do $FOO in $LANGUAGE".

For that junior to turn into a senior who prompts the way I do, they need a critical view of their questions, not just answers.

Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code

#55

Post by CGamesPlay »

intralogic wrote: post #32

[flagged]

In general, "reader mode". I don't use Chrome but Google suggests that it's in a menu https://support.google.com/chrome/answer/14218344?hl=en>. Many Chrome-alikes provide it built-in (Brave calls it Speedreader), and many extensions can add it for you (Readability was the OG one).

Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code

#56

Post by bakugo »

fallinditch wrote: post #39
sorcerer-mar wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You pay junior devs way way way more money for the privilege of them being bad. And since they're human, the juniors themselves do not have the patience of an LLM. I really would not want to be a junior dev right now... Very unfair and undesirable situation they've landed in.

Maybe it's the senior devs who should be the ones to worry? Seniors' attitudes on HN are often quick to dismiss AI assisted coding as something that can't replace the hard-earned experience and skill they've built up during their careers. Well maybe, maybe not. Senior devs can get a bit myopic in their specializations. Whereas a junior Dev doesn't have so much baggage, maybe the fertile brains of youth are better in…

> Maybe it's the senior devs who should be the ones to worry?

Why would they be worried?

Who else going to maintain the massive piles of badly designed vibe code being churned out at an increasingly alarming pace? The juniors prompting it certainly don't know what any of it does, and the AIs themselves have proven time and again to be incapable of performing basic maintenance on codebases above a very basic level of complexity.

As the ladder gets pulled up on new juniors, and the "fertile brains" of the few who do get a chance are wasted as they are actively encouraged to not learn anything and just let a computer algorithm do the thinking for them, ensuring they will never have a chance to become seniors themselves, who else will be left to fix the mess?

Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code

#57

Post by jayofdoom »

BoredPositron wrote: post #11

If people would be as patient and inventive to teach junior devs as they are with llms the whole industry would be better of.

I spent a lot of time in my career, honestly some of the most impactful stuff I've done, mentoring college students and junior developers. I think you are dead on about the skills being very similar. Being verbose, not making assumptions about existing context, and generalized warnings against pitfalls when doing the sort of thing you're asking it to do goes a long long way.

Just make sure you talk to Claude in addition to the humans and not instead of.

Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code

#58

Post by tonyhart7 »

fallinditch wrote: post #39
sorcerer-mar wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You pay junior devs way way way more money for the privilege of them being bad. And since they're human, the juniors themselves do not have the patience of an LLM. I really would not want to be a junior dev right now... Very unfair and undesirable situation they've landed in.

Maybe it's the senior devs who should be the ones to worry? Seniors' attitudes on HN are often quick to dismiss AI assisted coding as something that can't replace the hard-earned experience and skill they've built up during their careers. Well maybe, maybe not. Senior devs can get a bit myopic in their specializations. Whereas a junior Dev doesn't have so much baggage, maybe the fertile brains of youth are better in…

we literally have many no code solution like wordpress etc

do webdev is still there??? yes there are just because you can "create" something that doesn't mean you knowledge able in that area

we literally have entire industry created to fix wordpress instance + code, what do you else we need to worry for

Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code

#59

Post by groby_b »

bravesoul2 wrote: post #9
tinyhouse wrote: post #6

This article is a bit all over the place. First, a slide deck to describe a codebase is not that useful. There's a reason why no one ever uses a slide deck for anything besides supporting an oral presentation. Most of these things in the post aren't new capabilities. The automation of workflows is indeed valuable and cool. Not sure what AGI has anything to do with it.

Also I don't trust it. They touched on that I think (I only skimmed). Plus you shouldn't need an LLM to understand a codebase. Just make it more understandable! Of course capital likes shortcuts and hacks to get the next feature out in Q3.

> Plus you shouldn't need an LLM to understand a codebase. Just make it more understandable!

And fundamentally, that isn't a function of "capital". All code bases are shaped by the implicit assumptions of their writers. If there's a fundamental mismatch or gap between reader and writer assumptions, it won't be readable.

LLMs are a way to make (some of) these implict assumptions more legible. They're not a panacea, but the idea of "just make it more understandable" is not viable. It's on par with "you don't need debuggers, just don't write bugs"

Re: Snorting the AGI with Claude Code

#60

Post by lubujackson »

dwohnitmok wrote: post #2

On the one hand very cool. On the other hand, every time people are just spinning off sub-agents I am reminded of this: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/kpPnReyBC54KESiSn/optimality... It's simultaneously the obvious next step and portends a potentially very dangerous future.

Am I the only one who saw in the prompt:

> ${SUGESTION}

And recognized it wouldn't do anything because of a typo? Alas, my kind is not long for this world...

Post reply on HN