The future of software development is software developers

Post by 63stack » Tue, Dec 30, 2025, 11:49 PM UTC

dent9 wrote: post #321

hansmayer wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm sure you're interacting with a ton of tools built via agents, ironically even in software engineering people are trying to human-wash AI code due to anti-AI bias Please just for fun - reach out to for example Klarna support via their website and tell me how much of your experience can be attributed to an anti-AI bias and how much to the fact that the LLMs are a complete shit for any important production use cas…

My man here is reaching out to Klarna Support, this tells a LOT about his life decision making skills which clearly shine through as well in his comments on the topic of AI

Post by 63stack » Tue, Dec 30, 2025, 11:52 PM UTC

CuriouslyC wrote: post #97

davnicwil wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would say while LLMs do improve productivity sometimes, I have to say I flatly cannot believe a claim (at least without direct demonstration or evidence) that one person is doing the work of 20 with them in december 2025 at least. I mean from the off, people were claiming 10x probably mostly because it's a nice round number, but those claims quickly fell out of the mainstream as people realised it's just not that b…

It's entirely dependent on the type of code being written. For verbose, straightforward code with clear cut test scenarios, one agent can easily 24/7 the work of 20 FT engineers. This is a best case scenario. Your productivity boost will depend entirely on a combination of how much you can remove yourself from the loop (basically, the cost of validation per turn) and how amenable the task/your code is to agents (whic…

Post by brulard » Wed, Dec 31, 2025, 1:01 AM UTC

keyle wrote: post #72

doug_durham wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should look at other engineering disciplines. How many highway over passes have unique “chef quality” designs? Very few. Most engineering is commodity replications of existing designs. The exact same thing applies to software engineering. Most of us engineers are replicating designs that came earlier. LLMs are good at generating the rote designs that make up the bulk of software by volume. Who benefit from an art…

Just like cooking in the middle ages. As the kitchen, hygiene, etc. got better, so did the chefs and so did the food. This is just a transition. re-Rest API, you're right. But again, we use roombas to vacuum when the floor layout is friendly to them. Not all rooms can be vacuumed by roombas. Simple Rest api can be emitted one shot from an LLM and there is no room for interpretation. But ask a future LLM to make a new…

Post by charcircuit » Wed, Dec 31, 2025, 1:30 AM UTC

mdemare wrote: post #492

charcircuit wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>at least in the sense that your abstractions are novel and the shape of the abstraction set is different from the standard things that exist People shouldn't be doing this in the first place. Existing abstractions are sufficient for building any software you want.

Software development is a bit like chess. 1. e4 is an abstraction available to all projects, 3. Nc3 is available to 20% of projects, while 15. Nxg5 is unique to your own project. Or, abstractions in your project form a dependency tree, and the nodes near the root are universal, e.g. C, Postgres, json, while the leaf nodes are abstractions peculiar to just your own project.

Post by insane_dreamer » Wed, Dec 31, 2025, 2:30 AM UTC

mkozlows wrote: post #466

Mongoose wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always liken it to using Uber in ~2012. It was fun to get around major metro areas for dirt cheap. But then prices rose dramatically over the next decade+ as the company was forced to wean itself off of VC subsidies.

... and people kept using Uber.