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

Coding after coders: The end of computer programming as we know it?

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 469 posts

Re: Coding after coders: The end of computer programming as we know it?

#61

Post by thegrim33 »

jcranmer wrote: post #51
htx80nerd wrote: post #18

You have to hold AI hand to do even simple vanilla JS correctly. Or do framework code which is well documented all over the net. I love AI and use it for programming a lot, but the limitations are real.

I must say, I do love how this comment has provoked such varying responses. My own observations about using AI to write code is that it changes my position from that of an author to a reviewer. And I find code review to be a much more exhausting task than writing code in the first place, especially when you have to work out how and why the AI-generated code is structured the way it is.

There's a very wide range of programming tasks of differing difficulty that people are using / trying to use it for, and a very wide range of intelligence amongst the people that are using / trying to use it, and who are evaluating its results. Hence, different people have very different takes.

Re: Coding after coders: The end of computer programming as we know it?

#62

Post by xtracto »

htx80nerd wrote: post #18

You have to hold AI hand to do even simple vanilla JS correctly. Or do framework code which is well documented all over the net. I love AI and use it for programming a lot, but the limitations are real.

The other day I (well, the AI) just wrote a Rust app to merge two (huge, GB of data) tables by discovering columns with data in common based on text distance (levenshtein and Dice) . It worked beautifully

An i have NEVER made one line of Rust.

I dont understand nay-sayers, to me the state of gen.AI is like the simpsons quote "worst day so far". Look were we are within 5 years of the first real GPT/LLM. The next 5 years are going to be crazy exciting.

The "programmer" position will become a "builder". When we've got LLMs that generate Opus quality text at 100x speed (think, ASIC based models) , things will get crazy.

Re: Coding after coders: The end of computer programming as we know it?

#63

Post by ares623 »

fixxation92 wrote: post #22

Conversations of the future... "Can you believe that Dad actually used to have to go into an office and type code all day long, MAUALLY??! Line by line, with no advice from AI, he had to think all by himself!"

More likely:

"Dad, I've sent out 1000 applications and haven't had a call back. I can't take it anymore. Has it always been like this?"

The Dad: It's not my fault!

Re: Coding after coders: The end of computer programming as we know it?

#64

Post by npinsker »

xtracto wrote: post #62
htx80nerd wrote: post #18

You have to hold AI hand to do even simple vanilla JS correctly. Or do framework code which is well documented all over the net. I love AI and use it for programming a lot, but the limitations are real.

The other day I (well, the AI) just wrote a Rust app to merge two (huge, GB of data) tables by discovering columns with data in common based on text distance (levenshtein and Dice) . It worked beautifully An i have NEVER made one line of Rust. I dont understand nay-sayers, to me the state of gen.AI is like the simpsons quote "worst day so far". Look were we are within 5 years of the first real GPT/LLM. The next 5 yea…

Human minds are built to find patterns, and you should be careful not to assume the rate of improvement will continue forever based on nothing but a pattern.

Re: Coding after coders: The end of computer programming as we know it?

#65

Post by seanmcdirmid »

jcranmer wrote: post #51
htx80nerd wrote: post #18

You have to hold AI hand to do even simple vanilla JS correctly. Or do framework code which is well documented all over the net. I love AI and use it for programming a lot, but the limitations are real.

I must say, I do love how this comment has provoked such varying responses. My own observations about using AI to write code is that it changes my position from that of an author to a reviewer. And I find code review to be a much more exhausting task than writing code in the first place, especially when you have to work out how and why the AI-generated code is structured the way it is.

> especially when you have to work out how and why the AI-generated code is structured the way it is.

You could just ask it? Or you don’t trust the AI to answer you honestly?

Re: Coding after coders: The end of computer programming as we know it?

#66

Post by fauchletenerum »

npinsker wrote: post #64
xtracto wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other day I (well, the AI) just wrote a Rust app to merge two (huge, GB of data) tables by discovering columns with data in common based on text distance (levenshtein and Dice) . It worked beautifully An i have NEVER made one line of Rust. I dont understand nay-sayers, to me the state of gen.AI is like the simpsons quote "worst day so far". Look were we are within 5 years of the first real GPT/LLM. The next 5 yea…

Human minds are built to find patterns, and you should be careful not to assume the rate of improvement will continue forever based on nothing but a pattern.

The overall trend in AI performance will still be up and to the right like everything else in computing over the past 50 years, improvement doesn't have to be linear

Re: Coding after coders: The end of computer programming as we know it?

#67

Post by Mars008 »

wek wrote: post #42
htx80nerd wrote: post #18

You have to hold AI hand to do even simple vanilla JS correctly. Or do framework code which is well documented all over the net. I love AI and use it for programming a lot, but the limitations are real.

This is not my experience either. If you put the work in upfront to plan the feature, write the test cases, and then loop until they pass... you can build a lot of high quality software quickly. The difference between a junior engineer using it and a great architect using it is significant. I think of it as an amplifier.

> The difference between a junior engineer using it and a great architect using it is significant

Yes, juniors are trying to use AI with the minimum input. This alone tells a lot..

Re: Coding after coders: The end of computer programming as we know it?

#68

Post by throwawaytea »

npinsker wrote: post #64
xtracto wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other day I (well, the AI) just wrote a Rust app to merge two (huge, GB of data) tables by discovering columns with data in common based on text distance (levenshtein and Dice) . It worked beautifully An i have NEVER made one line of Rust. I dont understand nay-sayers, to me the state of gen.AI is like the simpsons quote "worst day so far". Look were we are within 5 years of the first real GPT/LLM. The next 5 yea…

Human minds are built to find patterns, and you should be careful not to assume the rate of improvement will continue forever based on nothing but a pattern.

Just the fact that even retail quality hardware is still improving at local LLM significantly is still a great sign. If AI quality remained the same, and the cost for local hardware dropped to $1000, it would still be the greatest thing since the internet IMO. So even if the worst happens and all progress stops, I'm still very happy with what we got.

Re: Coding after coders: The end of computer programming as we know it?

#69

Post by suzzer99 »

fraywing wrote: post #44

I keep getting stuck on the liability problem of this supposed "new world". If we take this as far as it goes: AI agent societies that designs, architects, and maintains the entire stack E2E with little to no oversight. What happens when rogue AIs do bad things? Who is responsible? You have to have fireable senior engineers that understand deep fundamentals to make sure things aren't going awry, right? /s

Check out the movie Brazil, if you haven't seen it already. Incredibly far ahead of its time.

Re: Coding after coders: The end of computer programming as we know it?

#70

Post by sjeiuhvdiidi »

It's all nonsense. It's just better search, intelligence in not artificial. They are trying to convince everyone that they don't need to pay programmers. That's all, all it is. It'll work on the ignorant who'll take less money to make sure it works and fix the bugs, which is mostly what they were paying for anyway. They just want to devalue the work of the people they are reliant on. Nothing new.
Post reply on HN