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

Malleable Software

mdubakov.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 100 posts

Re: Malleable Software

#61

Post by activitypea »

rco8786 wrote: post #58

> AI thrives in messy, open-ended spaces Isn't the exact opposite of what AI is good at? That sounds like a great way to get tons of hallucinations. Every "how to AI good" guide I read is all about providing it with ample structure and narrow instructions.

To be reductive about the example of a malleable task tracker (e.g. Notion), if the LLM correctly interprets the user's prompt, there's about 20-30 useful buttons in the interface, and there's a sequence of those buttons that achieves the user's desired outcome. It's open-ended in terms of what you make, but the set of available actions is fairly tight, and the problem is finding a sequence of those actions.

Re: Malleable Software

#62

Post by tossandthrow »

movedx wrote: post #51
tossandthrow wrote: post #45

Yes and no. Malleability is opposed to institution. When everything is hyper malleable everybody will need to be trained and change management will take up a large proportion of time. The main reason why a lot of people go with Jira is not quality of the software - but the institutional buy-in. Employees, current and prospect, know how to work with the tool. The greater change is likely labor disruption.

> Employees, current and prospect, know how to work with the tool. Just an FYI, this isn't the case at all. I've contracted and consulted at well over 20+ business at this point, and no one knows how-to use that hot garbage.

Let me rephrase that to "be familiar with" then.

Re: Malleable Software

#63

Post by crote »

tablet wrote: post #39
jaimebuelta wrote: post #29

I see some of this, from the point of view that it's going to be cheaper to create bespoke solutions for problems. And perhaps a "neoSaaS" company is one that, from a very bare bones idea, can create your own implementation. But, at the same time, there are two issues: - Companies can be really complex. The "create a system and parametrise it" idea has been done before, and those parametrisation processes are pretty…

Your arguments are totally valid, niche tools will be alive and well. I think my take is that even in niche tools we will see a lot of generalization and more flexible niche tools will eventually win.

The problem is that software can be too flexible. A great example is companies ending up using Excel as a load-bearing database, relying on a bunch of incomprehensible macros to execute critical business logic.

Sure, it's flexible, but are they really better off than a competitor using properly-engineered one-off software? In the end, is there really a difference between software development and flexible-tool-configuration?

Re: Malleable Software

#64

Post by ch4s3 »

ethbr1 wrote: post #49
jaimebuelta wrote: post #29

I see some of this, from the point of view that it's going to be cheaper to create bespoke solutions for problems. And perhaps a "neoSaaS" company is one that, from a very bare bones idea, can create your own implementation. But, at the same time, there are two issues: - Companies can be really complex. The "create a system and parametrise it" idea has been done before, and those parametrisation processes are pretty…

> The best software around is the one that's opinionated. This. And it isn't going to change. The post avoids trying to answer "Why are opinionated tools popular and effective?" The answer is that a standardized process that they encourage is often more efficient than whatever bullshit {random company} came up with in-house. Malleable software needs to produce two equivalently good outcomes to beat opinionated: 1. Im…

Highly customizable configuration causes all kinds of problems in healthcare, and EHR customizations have actually killed people.

Re: Malleable Software

#65

Post by dirtybirdnj »

knowannoes wrote: post #2

Malleable software will eat you whole. None of this makes any sense. Do you know how computers work? This "AI" summer has turned into a drug fueled orgy of magical thinking. I am at my tether's end. I need to leave this industry to preserve my sanity at this point.

> a drug fueled orgy of magical thinking

This is just "management" thinking. You can thank your local MBA for poisoning the well for everyone else.

Leaders produce value. "Managers" are dumb parrots.

Re: Malleable Software

#66

Post by mariocesar »

I've been in SaaS for about 17 years, and a pattern I've seen is that for companies customers actually love, customization shows up as a milestone. It helps them find their own way of doing things, but eventually they settle into that way.

When it resonates with customers, it feels great.

Customizable SaaS is really just a side effect of the deeper need for control, because with control you can execute better. And when that lines up with capital, market fit, and a clear purpose, it creates more than efficiency, it creates meaning.

The companies that never settle, always chasing new patterns, usually end up with customers who don't enjoy them and employees who don't enjoy the software either.

Re: Malleable Software

#67

Post by RUnconcerned »

ch4s3 wrote: post #64
ethbr1 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The best software around is the one that's opinionated. This. And it isn't going to change. The post avoids trying to answer "Why are opinionated tools popular and effective?" The answer is that a standardized process that they encourage is often more efficient than whatever bullshit {random company} came up with in-house. Malleable software needs to produce two equivalently good outcomes to beat opinionated: 1. Im…

Highly customizable configuration causes all kinds of problems in healthcare, and EHR customizations have actually killed people.

In my first job I had to work with healthcare software and it horrified me. There is a standard for interop, HL7, but every system implements HL7 in its own special way so there are "integration engines" to massage the data so that they all conform to the same standard.

It's a gigantic grift.

Re: Malleable Software

#68

Post by osigurdson »

jaimebuelta wrote: post #29

I see some of this, from the point of view that it's going to be cheaper to create bespoke solutions for problems. And perhaps a "neoSaaS" company is one that, from a very bare bones idea, can create your own implementation. But, at the same time, there are two issues: - Companies can be really complex. The "create a system and parametrise it" idea has been done before, and those parametrisation processes are pretty…

I think the article presents a bit of an odd premise - I can make a mini app in ChatGPT today so by 2035 I can create an entire suite of software needed for a given business. What is the requisite change between what I can do now and in 2035? Presumably it is AGI.

OK, so we are in a digital super intelligence world in 2035. The HR department can now just have a conversation with a chatbot and create software to make them more productive. No more configuring SAP widgets or whatever they do today. The chatbot will be like "hey bro, the process that you want to automate doesn't make any sense: here is a better way. And, by the way, I'm terminating your entire department. I'll take care of it from now on". I mean, get real, in a post DGI world there will be exactly zero office jobs and no SaaS software at all.

Re: Malleable Software

#70

Post by jonathan-adly »

We have been running this playbook for the last 2 years in healthcare, and we have been super successful. Doubling every quarter over the last year. 70%+ profitability, almost 7 figures of revenue. 100% bootstrapped.

People are still mentally locked in to the world where code was expensive. Code now is extremely cheap. And if it is cheap, then it makes sense that every customer gets their own.

Before - we built factories to give people heavy machinery. Now, we run a 3d printer.

Everyday I thank SV product-led growth cargo cults for telling, sometimes even forcing our competition to not go there.

Post reply on HN