Live data from Hacker News

A few random notes from Claude coding quite a bit last few weeks

twitter.com

681–690 of 870 posts

Re: A few random notes from Claude coding quite a bit last few weeks

#681
post #65

I worry about the "brain atrophy" part, as I've felt this too. And not just atrophy, but even moreso I think it's evolving into "complacency". Like there have been multiple times now where I wanted the code to look a certain way, but it kept pulling back to the way it wanted to do things. Like if I had stated certain design goals recently it would adhere to them, but after a few iterations it would forget again and g…

[dead]

Re: A few random notes from Claude coding quite a bit last few weeks

#682

> You realize that stamina is a core bottleneck to work There has been a lot of research that shows that grit is far more correlated to success than intelligence. This is an interesting way to show something similar. AIs have endless grit (or at least as endless as your budget). They may outperform us simply because they don't ever get tired and give up. Full quote for context: Tenacity. It's so interesting to watch…

[dead]

Re: A few random notes from Claude coding quite a bit last few weeks

#683

Touching on the atrophy point, I actually wrote a few thoughts about this yesterday: https://www.neilwithdata.com/outsourced-thinking I actually disagree with Andrej here re: "Generation (writing code) and discrimination (reading code) are different capabilities in the brain." and I would argue that the only reason he can read code fluently, find issues, etc. is because he has spent year in a non-AI assisted world wr…

great article and many great points here

Re: A few random notes from Claude coding quite a bit last few weeks

#684
post #65

I worry about the "brain atrophy" part, as I've felt this too. And not just atrophy, but even moreso I think it's evolving into "complacency". Like there have been multiple times now where I wanted the code to look a certain way, but it kept pulling back to the way it wanted to do things. Like if I had stated certain design goals recently it would adhere to them, but after a few iterations it would forget again and g…

Another thing I’ve experienced is scope creep into the average. Both Claude and ChatGPT keep making recommendations and suggestions that turns the original request into something that resembles other typical features. Sometimes that’s a good thing, because it means I’ve missed something. A lot of times, especially when I’m just riffing on ideas, it turns into something mundane and ordinary and I’ll have lost my earlier train of thought.

A quick example is trying to build a simple expenses app with it. I just want to store a list of transactions with it. I’ve already written the types and data model and just need the AI to give me the plumping. And it will always end up inserting recommendations about double entry bookkeeping.

Re: A few random notes from Claude coding quite a bit last few weeks

#685
post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm worried about that too. If the error is reproducible, the model can eventually figure it out from experience. But a ghost bug that I can't pattern? The model ends up in a "you're absolutely right" loop as it incorrectly guesses different solutions.

Are ghost bugs even real? My first job had the Devs working front-line support years ago. Due to that, I learnt an important lessons in bug fixing. Always be able to re-create the bug first. There are no such thing as ghost bugs, you just need to ask the reporter the right questions. Unless your code is multi-threaded, to which I say, good luck!

> Unless your code is multi-threaded, to which I say, good luck!

What isn't multi-threaded these days? Kinda hard to serve HTTP without concurrency, and practically every new business needs to be on the web (or to serve multiple mobile clients; same deal).

All you need is a database and web form submission and now you have a full distributed system in your hands.

Re: A few random notes from Claude coding quite a bit last few weeks

#686

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If humans are machines, they are still a subset of machines and they (among other animals) are the only ones who can be demotivated and so it is still a mistake to assume an entirely different kind of machine would have those properties." Yet.

Sure but the entire context of the discussion is surprisial that they don't .

Agreed - There is no guarantee of what will happen in the future. I'm not for or against the outcome, but certainly curious to see what it is.

Re: A few random notes from Claude coding quite a bit last few weeks

#687
post #65

I worry about the "brain atrophy" part, as I've felt this too. And not just atrophy, but even moreso I think it's evolving into "complacency". Like there have been multiple times now where I wanted the code to look a certain way, but it kept pulling back to the way it wanted to do things. Like if I had stated certain design goals recently it would adhere to them, but after a few iterations it would forget again and g…

yeah, because the thing is: at the end of the day: laying things out the way LLMs can understand is becoming more important than doing them the “right” way— a more insidious form of the same complacency. and one in which i am absolutely complicit.

Re: A few random notes from Claude coding quite a bit last few weeks

#688
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's not a model limit anymore, it's tools , skills, background agents, etc. It's an entire agentic environment.

Github copilot has support for this stuff as well. Agent skills, background/subagents, etc.

Implementation differences do matter. I haven't found Copilot to have as many issues as people say it does, but they are there. Their Gemini implementation is unusable, for example, and it's not because of the underlying models. They work fine in other harnesses.

Re: A few random notes from Claude coding quite a bit last few weeks

#690
post #564

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN is where I keep hearing the “50× more productive” claims the most. I’ve been reading 2024 annual reports and 2025 quarterlies to see whether any of this shows up on the other side of the hype. So far, the only company making loud, concrete claims backed by audited financials is Klarna and once you dig in, their improved profitability lines up far more cleanly with layoffs, hiring freezes, business simplification,…

> If Gen-AI were making tech workers even 10× more productive at scale, you’d expect to see it reflected in revenue per employee, margins, or operating leverage across the sector. If we’re even just talking a 2x multiplier, it should show up in some externally verifiable numbers.

I agree, and we might be seeing this but there is so much noise, so many other factors, and we're in the midst of capital re-asserting control after a temporary loss of leverage which might also be part of a productivity boost (people are scared so they are working harder).

The issue is that I'm not a professional financial analyst and I can't spend all day on comps so I can't tell through the noise yet if we're seeing even 2x related to AI.

But, if we're seeing 10x, I'd be finding it in the financials. Hell, a blind squirrel would, and it's simply not there.

Post reply on HN