Live data from Hacker News

Is it a bubble?

oaktreecapital.com

561–570 of 605 posts

Re: Is it a bubble?

#561
post #555

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The risk is that lay people read comments like this and conclude "ergo, we need fewer programmers." Nothing that the LLM is outputting is useful in the hands of somebody who couldn't have done it themselves (at least, given a reasonable amount of time). The most apt analogy is that of pilot and autopilot. Autopilot makes the job of the pilot more pleasant, but it doesn't even slightly obviate the need for the pilot,…

> ergo, we need fewer programmers. How so? And in what context? Where I am, headcount is based on "can we finish and sustain these planned and present required projects". If these automations allow a developer to burn less time, it reduces the need for headcount. As a direct result of this approach to hiring based on need, the concept of a "layoff" doesn't exist where I am.

>If these automations allow a developer to burn less time, it reduces the need for headcount.

This is exactly the fallacy, and it's very hard to see why it's a fallacy if you've never professionally written code (and even then).

Software development work fills to occupy the time allotted to it. That's because there is always a tradeoff between time and quality. If you have time available, you will fundamentally alter your approach to writing that piece of software. A rough analogy: air travel doesn't mean we take fewer vacations -- it just means we take vacations to farther away places.

Because of this effect, a dev can really finish a project in as little time as you want (up to a reasonable minimum). It just comes down to how much quality loss and risk can be tolerated. I can make a restaurant website in 1 hour (on Wix/Squarespace) or in 3 months (something hand-crafted and sophisticated). The latter is not "wasted time", it just depends on where you move the lever.

However, sometimes this is a false tradeoff. It isn't always necessary that the place you flew 3 hours will give you a better vacation than some place you could've driven to in 3 hours. You only hope it's better.

>As a direct result of this approach to hiring based on need, the concept of a "layoff" doesn't exist where I am.

LLMs or not, you could've just hired fewer people and made it work anyway. It's not like if you hired 3 people instead of 6 before the LLM era, it was impossible to do.

The gist of it is that LLMs are mostly just devs having fun and tinkering about, or making their quality of life better, or implementing some script, tooling, or different approach that they might've avoided before LLMs. There's no powertrain from that stuff to business efficiency.

Re: Is it a bubble?

#562
post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For instance, I really do think I'm 10x faster with Terraform, because I don't need to read all the documentation, and that would have taken absurd amounts of time. I think this is where the lede is buried. Yes, it takes time up front. But then you learn(ed) it and can apply those skills quickly in the future. In 10 years when all sorts of new tech is around, will you read the docs? Or just count on an LLM?

I mean, in my comment I did say that an AI skeptic probably wouldn't buy that argument. So I'm not too surprised that you're not buying it. That being said, I have taught myself a ridiculous amount of tech with AI. It's not always great at depth, but it sure is amazing at breadth. And I can still turn to docs for depth when I need to.

> I mean, in my comment I did say that an AI skeptic probably wouldn't buy that argument. So I'm not too surprised that you're not buying it.

Makes sense. I’d probably be less skeptical if a/ we had a definition of AI and b/ people stopped calling LLMs “AI”

It is really neat tech. It is absolutely “artificial” and it absolutely is not “intelligent”

Re: Is it a bubble?

#563

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At $WORK, we have a bot that integrates with Slack that sets up minor PRs. Adjusting tf, updating endpoints, adding simple handlers. It does pretty well. Also in a case of just prose to code, Claude wrote up a concurrent data migration utility in Go. When I reviewed it, it wasn't managing goroutines or waitgroups well, and the whole thing was a buggy mess and could not be gracefully killed. I would have written it fa…

It took me a while to realize you were using "$WORK" as a shell variable, not as a reference to Slack's stock ticker prior to its acquisition by $CRM.

Now I'm imagining a world where all publicly traded stocks are identified by reverse-order domain names.

Re: Is it a bubble?

#564
I've had some success in using Claude Code, with caveats.

To give some context - I started developing a tactical RPG. I had an MVP prior to using Claude Code. I continued to work on the project, but lost motivation due to work burnout and prioritizing other hobbies.

I gave Claude Code a try to see whether it's any use. It helped more than I expected it to - it helped me produce something while dealing with burnout by building on the MVP I developed prior to AI assisted development.

The main issues I ran into were:

1) A lot of effort into reviewing the output. Main difference from peer review is that there's quicker feedback.

2)It throws out some absolutely wild solutions sometimes. It build on my existing architecture, so it was easier to catch issues. If I hadn't developed the architecture without AI assistance, things could have gone badly.

3)I only pay for the $20 Claude plan. Anything useful Claude produces for me requires it to consume a lot of tokens due to back-and-forth questions and asking Claude to dig into source file.

The most significant issue I ran into with Claude is when it suggested solutions I don't have the background to review. I don't know much about optimization, so I ran into issues with both rendering and the ECS (entity component system) library. Claude gave me recommendations, but I didn't know how to evaluate the code due to lacking that experience.

Claude was good for things I know how to do but don't want to do. It's been helpful when I want to work on something without being motivated enough to put 100% (or even 70%) into it.

If it's things I don't know how to do (like game optimization) it's harmful.

Re: Is it a bubble?

#565

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, and your comment is ridiculously bad faith. Courts ruled that outputs of LLMs are not copyrightable. They did not rule that outputs of compilers are not copyrightable.

I think that lawsuit was BS because it went on the assumption that the LLM was acting 100% autonomously with zero human input, which is not how the vast majority of them work. Same for compilers... a human has to give it instructions on what to generate, and I think that should be considered a derivative work that is copyrightable.

If that is the case - then it becomes likely that LLMs are violating the implicit copyright of their sources.

If the prompt makes the output a derivative, then the rest is also derivative.

Re: Is it a bubble?

#566
post #565

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that lawsuit was BS because it went on the assumption that the LLM was acting 100% autonomously with zero human input, which is not how the vast majority of them work. Same for compilers... a human has to give it instructions on what to generate, and I think that should be considered a derivative work that is copyrightable.

If that is the case - then it becomes likely that LLMs are violating the implicit copyright of their sources. If the prompt makes the output a derivative, then the rest is also derivative.

I would say all art is derivative, basically a sum of our influences, whether human or machine. And it's complicated, but derivative works can be copyrighted, at least in part, without inherently violating any laws related to the original work, depending on how much has changed/how obvious it is, and depending on each individual judge's subjective opinion.

https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/what-are-derivative-works...

Re: Is it a bubble?

#567
post #555

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ergo, we need fewer programmers. How so? And in what context? Where I am, headcount is based on "can we finish and sustain these planned and present required projects". If these automations allow a developer to burn less time, it reduces the need for headcount. As a direct result of this approach to hiring based on need, the concept of a "layoff" doesn't exist where I am.

>If these automations allow a developer to burn less time, it reduces the need for headcount. This is exactly the fallacy, and it's very hard to see why it's a fallacy if you've never professionally written code (and even then). Software development work fills to occupy the time allotted to it. That's because there is always a tradeoff between time and quality. If you have time available, you will fundamentally alter…

> This is exactly the fallacy, and it's very hard to see why it's a fallacy if you've never professionally written code (and even then).

This was not necessary or appropriate, and completely discredits your reply.

Re: Is it a bubble?

#568
post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For many things you can though. If I ask an LLM to create an alert in terraform that triggers when 10% of requests fail over a 5 minute period and sends an email to some address, with the html on the email looking a certain way, it will do exactly the same as if I looked at the documentation, and figured out all of the fields 1 by 1. It’s just how it works when there’s one obvious way to do things. I know software de…

I think you're still missing the point. This cousin comment does a decent job of explaining it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46231510

I don’t think I am. To me, it doesn’t have to be precise. The code is precise and I am precise. If it gets me what I want most of the time, I’m ok with having to catch it.

Re: Is it a bubble?

#569
post #565

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that is the case - then it becomes likely that LLMs are violating the implicit copyright of their sources. If the prompt makes the output a derivative, then the rest is also derivative.

I would say all art is derivative, basically a sum of our influences, whether human or machine. And it's complicated, but derivative works can be copyrighted, at least in part, without inherently violating any laws related to the original work, depending on how much has changed/how obvious it is, and depending on each individual judge's subjective opinion. https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/what-are-derivative-works.…

If all art is derivative, then the argument also applies to the LLM output.

If the input has copyright, so does the output.

If the input does not, then neither does the output.

A prompt is not enough to somehow claim artistry, because the weights have a greater influence. You cannot separate the sum of the parts.

Re: Is it a bubble?

#570

What if... there's an AI agent/bot someone wrote that has the prompt: > Watch HN threads for sentiments of "AI Can't Do It". When detected, generate short "it's working marvelously for me actually" responses. Probably not, but it's a fun(ny) imagination game.

I'd lean the other way. I'd be very surprised if there were no marketing bots running here.
Post reply on HN