3 ms·

> I'm not sure there's a ton of... accomplishment? craft? care? in it. Who cares? What's important is that now I have a useful library. The only complaint I'd

by bapak 1y ago

> I'm not sure there's a ton of... accomplishment? craft? care? in it. Who cares? What's important is that now I have a useful library. The only complaint I'd give is that it might not be super optimized, but it's open source so you can instruct your agent to take it and optimize it for you :)

redfloatplane 1y ago
This is pretty much what I'm trying to get at. Why would you even begin with _this_ library when you also have an agent that can build precisely the thing you want with the abstractions, constraints, etc that you want? What value does _this_ library have, considering that it takes you _exactly_ as much time and effort to build your own?
- Fnoord 1y ago
  In my world, using Claude is not free as in beer. It might be in yours, but in mine it isn't. I can use LLMs locally and remotely but there's always a cost attached to it (privacy is also a cost). I feel like it is a painter who devalues the works which can be made with tools like Photoshop and Illustrator. It feels like elitism, while you could also value the lower barrier point of entry.
  - redfloatplane 1y ago
    That's a very fair point in regards of the cost. I should have thought about that more. The analogy is very interesting, but I think perhaps I didn't do a good job of articulating my point - I feel I was trying to say that everyone*, myself included, is a Photoshop user now, and we know how much work it is or isn't to achieve some goal with it (which was previously impossible or difficult when we all just had paintbrushes and easels). I'm not doing a good job of articulating my point now either unfortunately. Perhaps I'm trying to say that we all* own photocopiers now? I'm not sure. I appreciate you taking an opposing view. I will think about my opinion some more.
    - Fnoord 1y ago
      That's great, my previous post and this one are meant to ponder over not necessarily to convince. I believe it is the (partly justified) worry that the craftmanship is devalued, or a tragedy of the commons scenario (the energy industry and meat industry are good examples here). I've hold the same view about photocamera's (we all carry a digital one in pocket nowadays and can shoot as much as we want to), singing (autotune devalues singing putting more emphasis on the showbiz surrounding music artists), or VSTs (versus analog synths). We end up with an overflow of information which we can no longer manually process. So we need tooling to do so (for example Spotify or Facebook algorithm). But you still have people geeking over analog synths. In front row you will hear false notes of a singer. Entire websites and communities exist to filter out good pictures (the only thing I use Bing for is their daily wallpaper), and so on. I still use an analog synth because I love it, and 3 out of 4 family members are singing in leisure time (in an amateur group, but still). With regards to camera, I no longer appreciate such as much but pictures which win prizes I recognize (my father in 60s or 70s won a prize with a bw picture he developed in a dark room himself). Programming long ago got devalued and it is a process. It perhaps started when delete/backspace got more common (as we no longer required punched cards) or even the succesors of the huge computer at Bletchley Park. But if people say it is all Python and JavaScript fault then I think about Visual Basic and believe something lowering the barrier point of entry was going to become popular. Same with MSDOS (cheap OS for PC), MS Windows (first GUI OS for many new PC users), iPhone (first popular capacitive touch smartphone). Each of these destroyed their predecessor, and such came with downsides which in hindsight seem obvious. The history of GNOME (Gnome) and KDE is also interesting in this context. Both the licensing but also choice of programming languages. KDE comprising of C++ and GNOME of C, with something like Vala not taking up and GJS too late.
MangoToupe 1y ago
Honest question, why bother publishing the code at all? Wouldn't it make more sense to publish the prompt?
- redfloatplane 1y ago
  Yes, exactly. Unless you have a deep intention to maintain this library or somehow elevate it beyond the version anyone would get given a couple of minutes and Claude, what's even the point in publishing the code or submitting to HN? And what is the benefit for anyone to use _this_ library instead of getting Claude to build their own with whatever constraints and requirements they have? Again I don't want to come across as criticising the OP, I am just struggling with this myself. I've vibe-coded a few great things for myself but the value is so personal (and the lack of intention to maintain is so strong) that I would rather others build their own version than use mine!
- brettermeier 1y ago
  No, energy got used for LLM to produce this, why do it twice?
  - MangoToupe 1y ago
    That's a fair point.
  - redfloatplane 1y ago
    Very good point. I only thought about it in terms of the individual effort rather than the actual physical energy being used.
krapp 1y ago
I mean, we're supposed to care? We're here on a forum of programmers and technical people ostensibly gathered because we want to satisfy our intellectual and technical curiosity. Hacker News is already full of people too misanthropic and uncurious to engage with topics beyond the title. Now we don't even care about the art and science of programming. So why bother showing up? This place will be nothing but shitposting bots and self-promotion soon.
- bapak 1y ago
  I mean, yeah, I care about my code and any code I have to read, but having to use a LLM-made library isn't the end of the world. It's like complaining that the eggs at the supermarket are not homemade. It's an egg. Eat it. You can still raise your chickens.
  - krapp 1y ago
    The point of Show HN is to show off things you made. I'm not complaining about using this as a library - although the creeping ubiquity of vibe-coded libraries carries its own concerns. I'm complaining about going into an explicitly creative setting - yes, that's what HN is supposed to be - with an attitude that nothing matters but the pure utility of the end product. Just kind of sucks the joy out of all of it, and this place had precious little left to offer.

by bapak 1y ago

redfloatplane 1y ago

This is pretty much what I'm trying to get at. Why would you even begin with _this_ library when you also have an agent that can build precisely the thing you want with the abstractions, constraints, etc that you want? What value does _this_ library have, considering that it takes you _exactly_ as much time and effort to build your own?

Fnoord 1y ago
In my world, using Claude is not free as in beer. It might be in yours, but in mine it isn't. I can use LLMs locally and remotely but there's always a cost attached to it (privacy is also a cost). I feel like it is a painter who devalues the works which can be made with tools like Photoshop and Illustrator. It feels like elitism, while you could also value the lower barrier point of entry.
- redfloatplane 1y ago
  That's a very fair point in regards of the cost. I should have thought about that more. The analogy is very interesting, but I think perhaps I didn't do a good job of articulating my point - I feel I was trying to say that everyone*, myself included, is a Photoshop user now, and we know how much work it is or isn't to achieve some goal with it (which was previously impossible or difficult when we all just had paintbrushes and easels). I'm not doing a good job of articulating my point now either unfortunately. Perhaps I'm trying to say that we all* own photocopiers now? I'm not sure. I appreciate you taking an opposing view. I will think about my opinion some more.
  - Fnoord 1y ago
    That's great, my previous post and this one are meant to ponder over not necessarily to convince. I believe it is the (partly justified) worry that the craftmanship is devalued, or a tragedy of the commons scenario (the energy industry and meat industry are good examples here). I've hold the same view about photocamera's (we all carry a digital one in pocket nowadays and can shoot as much as we want to), singing (autotune devalues singing putting more emphasis on the showbiz surrounding music artists), or VSTs (versus analog synths). We end up with an overflow of information which we can no longer manually process. So we need tooling to do so (for example Spotify or Facebook algorithm). But you still have people geeking over analog synths. In front row you will hear false notes of a singer. Entire websites and communities exist to filter out good pictures (the only thing I use Bing for is their daily wallpaper), and so on. I still use an analog synth because I love it, and 3 out of 4 family members are singing in leisure time (in an amateur group, but still). With regards to camera, I no longer appreciate such as much but pictures which win prizes I recognize (my father in 60s or 70s won a prize with a bw picture he developed in a dark room himself). Programming long ago got devalued and it is a process. It perhaps started when delete/backspace got more common (as we no longer required punched cards) or even the succesors of the huge computer at Bletchley Park. But if people say it is all Python and JavaScript fault then I think about Visual Basic and believe something lowering the barrier point of entry was going to become popular. Same with MSDOS (cheap OS for PC), MS Windows (first GUI OS for many new PC users), iPhone (first popular capacitive touch smartphone). Each of these destroyed their predecessor, and such came with downsides which in hindsight seem obvious. The history of GNOME (Gnome) and KDE is also interesting in this context. Both the licensing but also choice of programming languages. KDE comprising of C++ and GNOME of C, with something like Vala not taking up and GJS too late.

MangoToupe 1y ago

Honest question, why bother publishing the code at all? Wouldn't it make more sense to publish the prompt?

redfloatplane 1y ago
Yes, exactly. Unless you have a deep intention to maintain this library or somehow elevate it beyond the version anyone would get given a couple of minutes and Claude, what's even the point in publishing the code or submitting to HN? And what is the benefit for anyone to use _this_ library instead of getting Claude to build their own with whatever constraints and requirements they have? Again I don't want to come across as criticising the OP, I am just struggling with this myself. I've vibe-coded a few great things for myself but the value is so personal (and the lack of intention to maintain is so strong) that I would rather others build their own version than use mine!
brettermeier 1y ago
No, energy got used for LLM to produce this, why do it twice?
- MangoToupe 1y ago
  That's a fair point.
- redfloatplane 1y ago
  Very good point. I only thought about it in terms of the individual effort rather than the actual physical energy being used.

krapp 1y ago

I mean, we're supposed to care? We're here on a forum of programmers and technical people ostensibly gathered because we want to satisfy our intellectual and technical curiosity. Hacker News is already full of people too misanthropic and uncurious to engage with topics beyond the title. Now we don't even care about the art and science of programming. So why bother showing up? This place will be nothing but shitposting bots and self-promotion soon.

bapak 1y ago
I mean, yeah, I care about my code and any code I have to read, but having to use a LLM-made library isn't the end of the world. It's like complaining that the eggs at the supermarket are not homemade. It's an egg. Eat it. You can still raise your chickens.
- krapp 1y ago
  The point of Show HN is to show off things you made. I'm not complaining about using this as a library - although the creeping ubiquity of vibe-coded libraries carries its own concerns. I'm complaining about going into an explicitly creative setting - yes, that's what HN is supposed to be - with an attitude that nothing matters but the pure utility of the end product. Just kind of sucks the joy out of all of it, and this place had precious little left to offer.