4 ms·

I don’t find this article particularly convincing. The main argument seems to be “It couldn’t be real engineers, it would be too slow” but I have no clue what t

I don’t find this article particularly convincing. The main argument seems to be “It couldn’t be real engineers, it would be too slow” but I have no clue what the Builder.ai interface or response times were like. Also it says 10-20min would be too long… kind of? Not really though? Depends on the output. Claude Code has run for quite a while on its own before (I’ve never timed it) but 5-10+min doesn’t shock me. Yes, Claude is giving real-time output but I’ve seen a number of dev tools that don’t (or didn’t, this area is moving fast). Also, re: hiring outsourced contractors > However, we didn't anticipate the significant fraud that would ensue First time? Every experience I have personally had with outsourced contractors has been horrible. Bad code quality, high billing hours for low output, language and time barriers, the list goes on. I’m quick to flip the bozo bit on anyone pushing for outsourcing, engineers are not just cogs in a machine to start with and outsourced contractors are almost less useful than current LLM coding tools IMHO. If you already have to explain things in excruciating detail, you might as well talk to an LLM. People really want this black box that they can feed money and input into and have full-fledged applications and platforms pop out the other side. It doesn’t exist. I have only seen failures with outsourcing on this front and so far LLMs haven’t been able to do it either. Don’t get me wrong LLM’s are actually useful in my opinion, just not for writing all the code unsupervised or “vibe coding”.

pyman 1y ago
It's common sense: you either believe what you read on Bernhard Engelbrecht's Twitter account (this is the same crypto influencer who scammed startup founders out of thousands of dollars) or you trust what's published on The Pragmatic Engineer blog, who actually read Bernhard's tweet and spoke to the people who built the tech. > I don't find this article particularly convincing I think you missed the point of the article. It's saying: this is what the conspiracy theorists want me to believe but it doesn't add up, so I'm going to pick up the phone and call the people who built it. At that point, it's engineers talking to engineers. And the post is the outcome of that conversation.

pyman 1y ago

It's common sense: you either believe what you read on Bernhard Engelbrecht's Twitter account (this is the same crypto influencer who scammed startup founders out of thousands of dollars) or you trust what's published on The Pragmatic Engineer blog, who actually read Bernhard's tweet and spoke to the people who built the tech. > I don't find this article particularly convincing I think you missed the point of the article. It's saying: this is what the conspiracy theorists want me to believe but it doesn't add up, so I'm going to pick up the phone and call the people who built it. At that point, it's engineers talking to engineers. And the post is the outcome of that conversation.