[flagged]
Why would you do this?
[flagged]
DrawAFish.com Postmortem
71–80 of 113 posts
Re: DrawAFish.com Postmortem
#72[deleted]
Re: DrawAFish.com Postmortem
#73> You may have heard differently, especially if you saw my doxxing[4b] on the unsavory website. Is it pretty common to get doxxed for getting to the top of HN?
Just scroll to the bottom of this page and look at the idiots bragging about making swastika fishes. HN nurtures this community of mentally ill edgelords that we could very well do without.
Re: DrawAFish.com Postmortem
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is pretty reductive of the actual problem people typically complain about with vibe coding - It produces very workable prototypes fairly quickly and without a lot of hassle. Great! The problem is, and this is a great example (of many) where someone mistook the working prototype with a system that was ready for production. The JWT thing in particular is not really a mistake many people who work on that kind of th…
it's just incompleteness -- a human issue. most in-use LLMs prompted with a simple "You're in charge of infrastructure security, let's review possible problem points" would have uncovered this. I wouldn't fault a compiler for erring when someone left out a period; i'd tell the person to start including it -- but for some reason the expectation for LLMs is hands-off work ; I guess we're just in that phase of the hype…
> I wouldn't fault a compiler for erring when someone left out a period
I'd fault it if it silently injected multiple serious vulnerabilities.
Re: DrawAFish.com Postmortem
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
“Be specific.” Am I the only one that feels like it’s really condescending when people say this on the internet? It sounds like something you would see on a community college writing assignment
It does sound condescending. I think the sentiment is important though. Asking someone to be specific can help them think clearly. What’s a nicer way to do that?
I think "Who, specifically, claims that [...]?" comes off as less condescending than "Who claims that [...]? Be specific." just by virtue of the latter using imperative language, which triggers a reflexive "you're not the boss of me" reaction.
Re: DrawAFish.com Postmortem
#76> I vibe coded... Well, there ya go. To be fair, it says the attention was unexpected, and this was just a coding exercise... And the port-mortem shows what I'd hope to see: digging in and figuring out root causes. So I'm not judging OP poorly over this. But still. Launching a vibe-coded app that accepts input from anonymous users is just asking for trouble. I'm frankly surprised it ran as long as it did without such…
Ultimately an app like this caused more joy than harm. I'm all for people vibe coding fun little things like this when the stakes are low. Would prefer to see more non coders with diverse ideas feeling empowered to start a project rather than them seeing a huge wall to climb and never starting. The web needs more silly apps from silly people.
Re: DrawAFish.com Postmortem
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
It does sound condescending. I think the sentiment is important though. Asking someone to be specific can help them think clearly. What’s a nicer way to do that?
I think "Who, specifically, claims that [...]?" comes off as less condescending than "Who claims that [...]? Be specific." just by virtue of the latter using imperative language, which triggers a reflexive "you're not the boss of me" reaction.
The message is clear in both cases. It's easier to put aside these irrational reflexive reactions and think about
whatever worth can be derived from the message than it is to carefully manage the emotions of varied readers whom you don't know. This is different from bring overtly inflammatory, although the lines for this are subjective.
Re: DrawAFish.com Postmortem
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
IP based breaks users with CGNAT and people connecting from corporate networks In those cases you'd be denied votes since someone else used them up
The first case would be an issue yes, although this app doesn't exactly strike me as something that an insane amount of people would be connecting to from corporate networks
It can work okay for apps that don't go to massive scale and where users aren't concentrated in the same place. The chance of another simultaneous user on your block/building/CGNAT isn't extremely likely.
Re: DrawAFish.com Postmortem
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think "Who, specifically, claims that [...]?" comes off as less condescending than "Who claims that [...]? Be specific." just by virtue of the latter using imperative language, which triggers a reflexive "you're not the boss of me" reaction.
The message is clear in both cases. It's easier to put aside these irrational reflexive reactions and think about whatever worth can be derived from the message than it is to carefully manage the emotions of varied readers whom you don't know. This is different from bring overtly inflammatory, although the lines for this are subjective.
Ultimately it's probably not a productive use of time to be commenting here at all from a strict EV perspective. Meaning that if you're posting here, you're probably getting something else out of it. The value of that "something else" determines how you should approach the problem of managing the gut reactions of your readers.
If someone asks for a better way to word something to reduce reader hostility to their point, I assume that they will be better off for knowing the answer to that question, and can decide for themselves whether they want to change their writing style or not - and, whether they do or do not, the effects of their writing will be more intentional.