4 ms·

Download claude code. Use it. Try to build that thing that would take 5 people six months to do. You'll find very quickly that programmers are needed, and more

by muzani 1y ago

Download claude code. Use it. Try to build that thing that would take 5 people six months to do. You'll find very quickly that programmers are needed, and more skilled ones too. For a long time, we've been coders, developers. Mentally in the code. But now we work on the code. We're now engineers. We coordinate how the parts work together. I like this definition of engine: "any of various mechanical appliances, often used in combination" The most expensive model today is Claude Opus 4. It can draft plans. It can engage this plan. It can write tests, run tests, fix tests. All by itself. But if you don't keep an eye on it, it will run off and do something you didn't intend it to do for 20 minutes.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
HisoMorow 1y ago
True, thats how it is now, i m using the latest claude sonnet and albeit the results are pretty good, it can still be on some dumb stuff. But we are still in earlier stages and there is no telling what it might do in the future. Also, using such AI tools be interacting with them as normally might have them not work as effeciently as they can due to not knowing or forgeting structures, extra requirements, etc in the code. However, the platforms i talked about create the project on their own environment, which makes it easier for them to create something without going all over the place it seems. I m more worried on such tools that can operate with just creating immediate visible results based on requests from the user, without him needing to view and implement the suggested code himself and all
- muzani 1y ago
  If you push it to the limits, it's clearer which limits are a temporary problem and which are much harder to fix. Structures, architectures, context, these can be improved with more training, more data, more hardware. If you mean something that mocks things up quickly, Figma has always done that and it hasn't destroyed any jobs. But a huge part of coding has always been understanding the product and building a good feedback-product loop. The product loops will be a lot more efficient. But the glue between feedback-product has always been humans. If you somehow make a robot QA and a robot PM, these will probably be maintained by engineers. In the last few years, we've seen QA becoming very technical, and we'll probably see PMs be more technical or engineers being more product oriented. Even in my current job at a newer startup, there's no PM, only a funnel from sales to product. I think there will be a time when we see no code. No Java, no JS, and machines will just write machine language. This might still be... 30 years ahead, especially if you look at patterns in the last 30 years. But until then, we still need people who understands how one screen links to another, how APIs are called, how to debug them from logs. Claude Code is this future - it's amazing at this abstraction, but you can feel where it starts to fall apart.

by muzani 1y ago

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

HisoMorow 1y ago

True, thats how it is now, i m using the latest claude sonnet and albeit the results are pretty good, it can still be on some dumb stuff. But we are still in earlier stages and there is no telling what it might do in the future. Also, using such AI tools be interacting with them as normally might have them not work as effeciently as they can due to not knowing or forgeting structures, extra requirements, etc in the code. However, the platforms i talked about create the project on their own environment, which makes it easier for them to create something without going all over the place it seems. I m more worried on such tools that can operate with just creating immediate visible results based on requests from the user, without him needing to view and implement the suggested code himself and all

muzani 1y ago
If you push it to the limits, it's clearer which limits are a temporary problem and which are much harder to fix. Structures, architectures, context, these can be improved with more training, more data, more hardware. If you mean something that mocks things up quickly, Figma has always done that and it hasn't destroyed any jobs. But a huge part of coding has always been understanding the product and building a good feedback-product loop. The product loops will be a lot more efficient. But the glue between feedback-product has always been humans. If you somehow make a robot QA and a robot PM, these will probably be maintained by engineers. In the last few years, we've seen QA becoming very technical, and we'll probably see PMs be more technical or engineers being more product oriented. Even in my current job at a newer startup, there's no PM, only a funnel from sales to product. I think there will be a time when we see no code. No Java, no JS, and machines will just write machine language. This might still be... 30 years ahead, especially if you look at patterns in the last 30 years. But until then, we still need people who understands how one screen links to another, how APIs are called, how to debug them from logs. Claude Code is this future - it's amazing at this abstraction, but you can feel where it starts to fall apart.