Live data from Hacker News

AI Tribalism

nolanlawson.com

91–99 of 99 posts

Re: AI Tribalism

#91

What if I just enjoy how I work at the moment and don't really care about this stuff? Why do I _have_ to give it a go? Why don't LLM evangelists accept this as an option? Choosing not to use AI agents is maybe the only tool position I feel I've had to defend or justify in over a decade of doing this, and it's so bizarre to me. It almost reeks of insecurity from the Agent Evangelists and I wonder if all the "fear" and…

Nobody pushed you to use git when you were comfortable with svn? Nobody pushed you to use Docker when you were comfortable running bare metal? Nobody pushed you to write unit tests when you were comfortable not? Nobody pushed you to use CSS for layout when you were happy using tables? Some of those are before your time, but: The only time you don't get pushed to use new technologies is when a) nothing is changing and…

> Nobody pushed you to use git when you were comfortable with svn?

Generally, sensible companies held off on this sort of transition until the tool was mature and stable.

Way back in the day, I was involved in an abortive move from CVS to SVN. It went great for a week, then the SVN db corrupted itself irretrievably, taking a week's work with it... I think we finally moved for real about a year later, when SVN had abandoned its extremely unreliable BDB backend that early versions used.

Forcing adoption of [AI tool of the month] now feels a bit more like, say, adopting Darcs back during the DVCS wars than adopting git after it had won.

Re: AI Tribalism

#92
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think it's going to replace you, then it's going to replace you regardless of whether you personally are feeding it data or not. If it produces value for you, you should use it. If not, don't.

So far I have been able to trade some efficiency for more control in my professional life. All of my tooling is open-source and local. I hope I can get away with it this time as well though sure some adjustment will be needed

But why? Why not simply do/use whatever is most cost-effective? In the places where greater control leads to less efficiency, what is the benefit of control?

This is a genuine question -- I really don't understand. I appreciate local tooling when it helps my long-term efficiency, even if there's a learning curve. But not if cloud seems like it will always be more efficient. And while there are LLM's you can run locally, it doesn't seem like the ones useful for coding, with their vast memory and GPU requirements, will be realistic or cost-effective to run locally in the foreseeable future.

Re: AI Tribalism

#93
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So far I have been able to trade some efficiency for more control in my professional life. All of my tooling is open-source and local. I hope I can get away with it this time as well though sure some adjustment will be needed

But why? Why not simply do/use whatever is most cost-effective? In the places where greater control leads to less efficiency, what is the benefit of control? This is a genuine question -- I really don't understand. I appreciate local tooling when it helps my long-term efficiency, even if there's a learning curve. But not if cloud seems like it will always be more efficient. And while there are LLM's you can run local…

> But why? Why not simply do/use whatever is most cost-effective?

Because cost-effectiveness is a short term concern compared to...

> what is the benefit of control?

...the independence that being in control provides you in the long term. As for why to be independent, i hope it should be self-evident that being able to do what you want and work on without having to rely on 3rd parties for a core component of that work is a good thing.

And TBH i'm not sure why being fast at the cost of everything else (especially of independence and control) is even considered a good thing in the first place.

Re: AI Tribalism

#94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't. The general trend is that, in US rulings, courts have found that if the material was obtained legally, then training can be fair use. My understanding is that getting LLMs to regurgitate anything significant requires very specific prompting, in general. I would very much like someone to give me the magic reproduction triple: a model trained on your code, a prompt you gave it to produce a program, and its out…

> My understanding is that getting LLMs to regurgitate anything significant requires very specific prompting, in general. Then you have been mislead: https://arstechnica.com/features/2025/06/study-metas-llama-3... > I would very much like someone to give me the magic reproduction triple Here's how I saw it directly. Searched for "node http server example." Google's AI spit out an "answer." The first link was a Digita…

To your last statement: not at all. I think releasing all the chats publicly would show that basically no one is using ChatGPT to circumvent paywalls because the model was trained on that material.

As to your Ars article, I'm familiar because I read Ars.

> The chart shows how easy it is to get a model to generate 50-token excerpts from various parts of Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. The darker a line is, the easier it is to reproduce that portion of the book.

50-token excerpts are not my concern, that's 40 words. The argument that the plantiffs need to make is that people are not paying for the NYT because ChatGPT (part of the four fair use pillars, I could expand, but won't). That's gonna be tough. Let's revisit this after the ruling and/or settlement.

Re: AI Tribalism

#95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trying a new technology seems like what engineers do (since they have to leverage technology to solve real problems, having more tools to choose from can be good). I'm surprised it rings as tribalist.

The impression I get from this post is that anyone who doesn't like it needs to try it more. It doesn't really feel like it leaves space for "yeah, I tried it, and I still don't want to use it". I know what its capabilities are. If I wanted to manage a set of enthusiastic junior engineers, I'd work with interns, which I love doing because they learn and get better. (And I still wouldn't want to be the manager .) AIs…

I think it's going to be important to track. It's going to change things.

I agree on your specific points about what you prefer, and that's fine. But as I said 15 years ago to some recent Berkeley grads I was working with: "You have no right to your current job. Roles change."

AI will get better and be useful for some things. I think it is today. What I'm saying is that you want to be in the group that knows how to use it, and you can't there if you have no experience.

Re: AI Tribalism

#96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why? Why not simply do/use whatever is most cost-effective? In the places where greater control leads to less efficiency, what is the benefit of control? This is a genuine question -- I really don't understand. I appreciate local tooling when it helps my long-term efficiency, even if there's a learning curve. But not if cloud seems like it will always be more efficient. And while there are LLM's you can run local…

> But why? Why not simply do/use whatever is most cost-effective? Because cost-effectiveness is a short term concern compared to... > what is the benefit of control? ...the independence that being in control provides you in the long term. As for why to be independent, i hope it should be self-evident that being able to do what you want and work on without having to rely on 3rd parties for a core component of that wor…

> As for why to be independent, i hope it should be self-evident that being able to do what you want

To be honest, not really.

I have a million limitations in my life. Trying to achieve some kind of "independence" is not something I understand. I prefer to accept a kind of interdependence, to be part of an ecosystem. To work together, in sync, for mutual benefit.

I rely on third parties for my food, my housing, my health, my education, my technology, all of it. Using an LLM hosted elsewhere feels no different from using electricity generated elsewhere, or food grown elsewhere, or a computer manufactured elsewhere. So why the difference for you?

Re: AI Tribalism

#97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But why? Why not simply do/use whatever is most cost-effective? Because cost-effectiveness is a short term concern compared to... > what is the benefit of control? ...the independence that being in control provides you in the long term. As for why to be independent, i hope it should be self-evident that being able to do what you want and work on without having to rely on 3rd parties for a core component of that wor…

> As for why to be independent, i hope it should be self-evident that being able to do what you want To be honest, not really. I have a million limitations in my life. Trying to achieve some kind of "independence" is not something I understand. I prefer to accept a kind of interdependence, to be part of an ecosystem. To work together, in sync, for mutual benefit. I rely on third parties for my food, my housing, my he…

> I have a million limitations in my life.

Same but trying to add more limitations (in my view a reliance on a 3rd party to do what i want is a limitation) is not something i like to add without having an incredibly good reason without alternative options.

> So why the difference for you?

In general because each dependence comes with requirements and expectations (many of which i may not even know ahead of time) from my side. The simplest and most straightforward one when it comes to cloud LLMs would be the requirement to have internet connection (which i may or may not have, for a variety of reasons) and of course money to pay for it - and, at least with the way LLMs are currently monetized, that money would depend on how much i need it - and i may either not have that money or not want or even be able to spend it (again for whatever reasons). Even if someone else would pay (e.g. a workplace) this can have indirect effects, like my employer using the LLM use (either via how much i'd cost them for its use or how much i'm using it by counting tokens - the latter of which is something many people have mentioned is already being done, though for now it is to maximize LLM use as CEOs are still in their FOMO phase), which in turn have negative consequences for me.

Just like Microsoft nowadays has almost zero incentive to provide a good quality OS despite Linux existing, since they've captured an overwhelming majority of the desktop space, there is no guarantee that once some LLM provider captures the overwhelming majority of a market wont jack up prices and let quality languish even if there are theoretically alternatives - especially if said provider has built a dependency moat around it with various tools that only work with their LLMs (some LLM providers make their own tools and this isn't out of the good of their hearts).

But there is more to it than just the obvious stuff above. Being in control means nobody will force you do or not do something you dislike - even if you end up doing the same thing down the road, it'd be your decision, not someone else's forced on you.

One example i'm certain many people would have encountered is software updates making the experience of existing users worse. With something cloud-based there isn't much you can do - what if i liked the original GMail, YouTube or even Facebook interfaces more than their current incarnations? There is nothing i can do about it, i just have to accept that i have no control over them. The best i can do is hope that the developers, like in Reddit's case for example, would leave the old UI around and not mess with it much - but even then, i'm at the mercy of those developers, not in control myself. And while with something like GMail i could at least use a desktop application (and hope GMail doesn't remove the feature that make that possible), the core features of YouTube, Facebook and Reddit are mainly their userbases, not their UIs - i do not visit Facebook because i like how it works or behaves, i visit it because it is a point of contact with some family members and acquaintances. Similarly, i do not visit Reddit because i like its UX, i visit it because of the stuff people post and comment there.

Another example, more relevant to LLMs, would be when OpenAI upgraded ChatGPT from 3.5 to 4 or something like that (i do not use ChatGPT so i do not know) and people really disliked the change of tone their chatbots had. Say whatever you want about if that was good or not (though it'd be beside the point i'm trying to make), but ultimately, it was a clear example of someone in power (OpenAI) making changes that some of their users greatly disliked but had zero control or power to do anything about it. AFAIK a similar (though less publicized) issue was when Anthropic changed Claude 3 to Claude 4 but AFAIK Claude 3 still remains available - but that is, like with Reddit's case, because of Anthropic's "benevolence" (as long as it is financially viable for them, of course).

Willingly exposing myself to more dependencies, when my experience so far has shown that they come with long term consequences that are often not aligned with my desires isn't something i like doing. As you implied, there are already aspects of life where we do not have much control, but to me the existence of those acts more of an incentive to avoid losing further control where i can than to give up on it entirely.

On the topic of LLMs, from a personal perspective at least, if local LLMs end up being completely inadequate and making software becomes a matter of developers becoming little more than "remote LLM operators" then i'll just treat being a "remote LLM operator" the same way as being a secretary or accountant: something that i'm not interested in, even if their work often involves using computers.

Re: AI Tribalism

#98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As for why to be independent, i hope it should be self-evident that being able to do what you want To be honest, not really. I have a million limitations in my life. Trying to achieve some kind of "independence" is not something I understand. I prefer to accept a kind of interdependence, to be part of an ecosystem. To work together, in sync, for mutual benefit. I rely on third parties for my food, my housing, my he…

> I have a million limitations in my life. Same but trying to add more limitations (in my view a reliance on a 3rd party to do what i want is a limitation) is not something i like to add without having an incredibly good reason without alternative options. > So why the difference for you? In general because each dependence comes with requirements and expectations (many of which i may not even know ahead of time) from…

Very interesting, thanks that helps me understand.

It seems like you have what might be called an extreme sense of loss aversion, and so the more control and independence you have, the more you can prevent loss.

In contrast, I don't really have that. Sure I get annoyed when a software interface changes, but at the same time I see that the updates overall have also given me 10 other features I really appreciate, and so I see it as a net win. On the whole, I find that being embedded in a web of up-to-date dependencies has always been a large net positive on the whole. There are losses, but they are far outweighted by the wins, so whenever a loss bugs me I just remind myself of all the new helpful stuff. Like, Spotify's changes to UX drive me nuts sometimes. But they recently launched prompted playlists that have been a game changer for me. They added transitions between songs which is awesome. I'm using them to listen to audiobooks my library doesn't have. So I can put up with the UX.

But if you experiences losses psychologically as 10x the size of wins of the same "objective" size, then your calculus could be different. Pretty much everybody has loss aversion to some extent, it's considered a standard human trait -- I have to remind myself to put things into perspective myself sometimes -- but it sounds like you have a much stronger sense of it, so the control that greater independence gives you is much more valuable to you than it is to someone like me.

So that's why, when you say, "i hope it should be self-evident" -- it's not self-evident to someone like me at all, but I can see why it seems self-evident to you.

Re: AI Tribalism

#99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...from answers that were publicly shared without license. It's not the same thing, even though every LOVES to make this argument. Also: Over the past 20 years, I could count the number of times on one hand that I was been able to get away with out-right copy/paste from SO.

In a prior job, I had to scan a 2M+ line codebase for software license violations to support the sale of a unit to another corporation. One class of violation was using SO snippets, because they are licensed under CC and not compatible with the distribution model the new company was planning. Many weeks of work to track them all down.

Fair enough! Though my wholesale copy/paste point still stands.
Post reply on HN