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

We mourn our craft

nolanlawson.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

661–670 of 918 posts

Re: We mourn our craft

#661

Post by cat_plus_plus »

layer8 wrote: post #645
sosomoxie wrote: post #10

I started programming over 40 years ago because it felt like computers were magic. They feel more magic today than ever before. We're literally living in the 1980s fantasy where you could talk to your computer and it had a personality. I can't believe it's actually happening, and I've never had more fun computing. I can't empathize with the complaint that we've "lost something" at all. We're on the precipice of somet…

> I started programming over 40 years ago because it felt like computers were magic. They feel more magic today than ever before. Maybe they made us feel magic, but actual magic is the opposite of what I want computers to be. The “magic” for me was that computers were completely scrutable and reason-able, and that you could leverage your reasoning abilities to create interesting things with them, because they were (a…

I have no idea what everyone is talking about. LLMs are based on relatively simple math, inference is much easier to learn and customize than say Android APIs. Once you do you can apply familiar programming style logic to messy concepts like language and images. Give you model a JSON schema like "warp_factor": Integer if you don't want chatter, that's way better than Star Trek computer could do. Or have it write you a simple domain specific library on top of Android API that you can then program from memory like old style BASIC rather than having to run to stack overflow for evwery new task.

Re: We mourn our craft

#663

Post by utopiah »

So funny because "you’re still riding around on a fixie bike." that's literally what I do. I also take a plane to fly.

In that analogy that would be picking the right library/framework/service vs. vibe coding it. I do NOT need to write all the code to provide value.

Knowing which tool to use for the task is precisely what requires honing a skill and requires judgement. It's not about how many kilometers you manage to cover.

Re: We mourn our craft

#664

Post by nradov »

anilgulecha wrote: post #572
nradov wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're still allowed to program by hand. Even in assembly language if you like.

Imo, it's allowed theoretically, as a hobby, but not really as a practice. This is what the blog is about.

There are literally still programmers who make their living writing assembly code by hand for embedded systems.

Re: We mourn our craft

#665

Post by 0x696C6961 »

Jensson wrote: post #411
0x696C6961 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but it's easy to check if it's incorrect and try again.

When you use it to lookup a single word, yeah, but people here use it to lookup thousand words at once and then can't check it all.

That doesn't make the tool bad.

Re: We mourn our craft

#666

Post by layer8 »

cat_plus_plus wrote: post #661
layer8 wrote: post #645

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I started programming over 40 years ago because it felt like computers were magic. They feel more magic today than ever before. Maybe they made us feel magic, but actual magic is the opposite of what I want computers to be. The “magic” for me was that computers were completely scrutable and reason-able, and that you could leverage your reasoning abilities to create interesting things with them, because they were (a…

I have no idea what everyone is talking about. LLMs are based on relatively simple math, inference is much easier to learn and customize than say Android APIs. Once you do you can apply familiar programming style logic to messy concepts like language and images. Give you model a JSON schema like "warp_factor": Integer if you don't want chatter, that's way better than Star Trek computer could do. Or have it write you…

You can’t reason about inference (or training) of LLMs on the semantic level. You can’t predict the output of an LLM for a specific input other than by running it. If you want the output to be different in a specific way, you can’t reason with precision that a particular modification of the input, or of the weights, will achieve the desired change (and only that change) in the output. Instead, it’s like a slot machine that you just have to try running again.

The fact that LLMs are based on a network of simple matrix multiplications doesn’t change that. That’s like saying that the human brain is based on simple physical field equations, and therefore its behavior is easy to understand.

Re: We mourn our craft

#667

Post by jordanscales »

The inspired me to write down some scattered thoughts I have on this [0]. tl;dr I firmly believe we kicked the can down the road and now it's too late.

Things programmers forgot to do before AI started writing a bunch of software:

1. Learn how to review code

Some tools exist, some of them are even quite good! Large organizations have tried to build best practices to balance urgency with correctness, but programmers are still quite bad at this.

2. Compare program A vs program B

In a similar vein, we simply do not know how to measure one program vs another. Or a function against another. Or even one variableName vs another_variable_name.

"It depends" Depends on what? We never sorted this out.

3. Talk to other professions

We are not the first profession forced to coordinate with Automation as a coworker, and we certainly won't be the last. We're not even the first knowledge workers to do so.

How did other laborers deal with this? We don't know because we were busy making websites.

[0]: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:wh7bie3ld7bmg3cz76sbjkwj/po...

Re: We mourn our craft

#668

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

sosomoxie wrote: post #10

I started programming over 40 years ago because it felt like computers were magic. They feel more magic today than ever before. We're literally living in the 1980s fantasy where you could talk to your computer and it had a personality. I can't believe it's actually happening, and I've never had more fun computing. I can't empathize with the complaint that we've "lost something" at all. We're on the precipice of somet…

I tend to feel this way (also 40-year coder).

It's because of the way that I use the tools, and I have the luxury of being a craftsman, as opposed to a "TSA agent."

But then, I don't get paid to do this stuff, anymore. In fact, I deliberately avoid putting myself into positions, where money changes hands for my craft. I know how fortunate I am, to be in this position, so I don't say it to aggravate folks that aren't.

Re: We mourn our craft

#669

Post by rawgabbit »

jordanscales wrote: post #667

The inspired me to write down some scattered thoughts I have on this [0]. tl;dr I firmly believe we kicked the can down the road and now it's too late. Things programmers forgot to do before AI started writing a bunch of software: 1. Learn how to review code Some tools exist, some of them are even quite good! Large organizations have tried to build best practices to balance urgency with correctness, but programmers a…

Software was never governed by a single standard. It has always been closer to architecture or design, with competing schools judging quality differently. AI tools do not remove judgment; they make it unavoidable. I sit in a minimalist, almost brutalist school: fewer layers, obvious structure, and software that delivers results even if it is not fashionable.

Re: We mourn our craft

#670

Post by jsontsx »

im happy about this new era to weed out the gatekeepers of programming. its been insufferable for about a decade and a half.

leetcode, TC farming, praising anti social behavior, ego of devs at companies...

the archetype had to change

Post reply on HN