4 ms·

> percentage of good, well planned, consistent and coherent software is going to approach zero So everything stays exactly the same?

by pousada 8mo ago

Chance-Device 8mo ago
Underrated comment. The reason that everyone complains about code all the time is because most code is bad, and it’s written by humans. I think this can only be a step up. Nailing validation is the trick now.
- oblio 8mo ago
  Validation was always the hard part, outside of truly novel areas - think edges of computer science (which generally happen very rarely and only need to be explored once or a handful of times). Validation was always the hard part because great validation requires great design. You can't validate garbage.
falloutx 8mo ago
I get this comment everytime I say this but there are levels to this. What you think is bad today could be considered artisan when things become worse than today.
- bartread 8mo ago
  I mean, you've never used the desktop version of Deltek Maconomy, have you? Somehow I can tell. My point here is not to roast Deltek, although that's certainly fun (and 100% deserved), but to point out that the bar for how bad software can be and still, somehow, be commercially viable is already so low it basically intersects the Earth's centre of gravity. The internet has always been a machine that allows for the ever-accelerated publishing of complete garbage of all varieties, but it's also meant that in absolute terms more good stuff also gets published. The problem is one of volume not, I suspect, that the percentages of good versus crap change that much. So we'll need better tools to search and filter but, again, I suspect AI can help here too.
co_king_3 8mo ago
> So everything stays exactly the same? No, we get applications so hideously inefficient that your $3000 developer machine feels like it it's running a Pentium II with 256 MB of RAM. We get software that's as slow as it was 30 years ago, for no reason other than our own arrogance and apathy.
- rkomorn 8mo ago
  I find it hard to disagree with this (sadly). I do feels things in general are more "snappy" at the OS level, but once you get into apps (local or web), things don't feel much better than 30 years ago. The two big exceptions for me are video and gaming. I wonder how people who work in CAD, media editing, or other "heavy" workloads etc, feel.
  - co_king_3 8mo ago
    > I wonder how people who work in CAD, media editing, or other "heavy" workloads etc, feel. I would assume (generally speaking) that CAD and video editing applications are carefully designed for efficiency because it's an important differentiator between different applications in the same class. In my experience, these applications are some of the most exciting to use, because I feel like I'm actually able to leverage the power of my hardware. IMO the real issue are bloated desktop apps like Slack, Discord, Spotify, or Claude's TUI, which consume massive amounts of resources without doing much beyond displaying text or streaming audio files.
    - upboundspiral 8mo ago
      The problem with CAD is that mechanical engineering is still deeply proprietary, especially up and including the software stacks. There is basically no "open source" in mechanical engineering. So you are relegated to super heavy legacy applications that coast by through their integrations with other proprietary tools. Solidworks is much heavier then FreeCAD but FreeCAD didn't have integrations with simulation tools, with CAM software, used a different geometry engine than industry standard, etc, so when a company tried to turn FreeCAD into a product they failed. The only open source one sees in mechanical engineering comes out of academia, which while interesting, faces the problem that once the research funds dry up or the project finishes the software is dumped into the open in hard to find places, and is not further developed. I remain hopeful in the potential for open source, I believe that to have a truly accessible and innovative industry a greater level of openness is needed, but it is yet coming. I think CAD is a good place to start, as it is not a space where lots of hidden and closely guarded tricks are needed like in Finite Element Analysis. For personal uses FreeCAD is getting there. Snappier than Solidworks, but the workflow layout needs some work. I am also looking at projects such as https://zoo.dev https://zoo.dev. In mapping the design 1to1 to code (while keeping gui workflow as well) I think they have a real chance of offering enough value that new companies will be interested in trying out their approach. It opens the doors to automation analysis, and generation that while possible with something like Solidworks is cumbersome and not well documented.
gosub100 8mo ago
No, wealth gets more concentrated. Fewer people on the team will be able to afford a comfortable lifestyle and save for retirement. More will edge infinitesimally closer to "barely scraping by".

> percentage of good, well planned, consistent and coherent software is going to approach zero So everything stays exactly the same?

by pousada 8mo ago

> percentage of good, well planned, consistent and coherent software is going to approach zero So everything stays exactly the same?

Chance-Device 8mo ago

Underrated comment. The reason that everyone complains about code all the time is because most code is bad, and it’s written by humans. I think this can only be a step up. Nailing validation is the trick now.

oblio 8mo ago
Validation was always the hard part, outside of truly novel areas - think edges of computer science (which generally happen very rarely and only need to be explored once or a handful of times). Validation was always the hard part because great validation requires great design. You can't validate garbage.

falloutx 8mo ago

I get this comment everytime I say this but there are levels to this. What you think is bad today could be considered artisan when things become worse than today.

bartread 8mo ago
I mean, you've never used the desktop version of Deltek Maconomy, have you? Somehow I can tell. My point here is not to roast Deltek, although that's certainly fun (and 100% deserved), but to point out that the bar for how bad software can be and still, somehow, be commercially viable is already so low it basically intersects the Earth's centre of gravity. The internet has always been a machine that allows for the ever-accelerated publishing of complete garbage of all varieties, but it's also meant that in absolute terms more good stuff also gets published. The problem is one of volume not, I suspect, that the percentages of good versus crap change that much. So we'll need better tools to search and filter but, again, I suspect AI can help here too.

co_king_3 8mo ago

> So everything stays exactly the same? No, we get applications so hideously inefficient that your $3000 developer machine feels like it it's running a Pentium II with 256 MB of RAM. We get software that's as slow as it was 30 years ago, for no reason other than our own arrogance and apathy.

rkomorn 8mo ago
I find it hard to disagree with this (sadly). I do feels things in general are more "snappy" at the OS level, but once you get into apps (local or web), things don't feel much better than 30 years ago. The two big exceptions for me are video and gaming. I wonder how people who work in CAD, media editing, or other "heavy" workloads etc, feel.
- co_king_3 8mo ago
  > I wonder how people who work in CAD, media editing, or other "heavy" workloads etc, feel. I would assume (generally speaking) that CAD and video editing applications are carefully designed for efficiency because it's an important differentiator between different applications in the same class. In my experience, these applications are some of the most exciting to use, because I feel like I'm actually able to leverage the power of my hardware. IMO the real issue are bloated desktop apps like Slack, Discord, Spotify, or Claude's TUI, which consume massive amounts of resources without doing much beyond displaying text or streaming audio files.
  - upboundspiral 8mo ago
    The problem with CAD is that mechanical engineering is still deeply proprietary, especially up and including the software stacks. There is basically no "open source" in mechanical engineering. So you are relegated to super heavy legacy applications that coast by through their integrations with other proprietary tools. Solidworks is much heavier then FreeCAD but FreeCAD didn't have integrations with simulation tools, with CAM software, used a different geometry engine than industry standard, etc, so when a company tried to turn FreeCAD into a product they failed. The only open source one sees in mechanical engineering comes out of academia, which while interesting, faces the problem that once the research funds dry up or the project finishes the software is dumped into the open in hard to find places, and is not further developed. I remain hopeful in the potential for open source, I believe that to have a truly accessible and innovative industry a greater level of openness is needed, but it is yet coming. I think CAD is a good place to start, as it is not a space where lots of hidden and closely guarded tricks are needed like in Finite Element Analysis. For personal uses FreeCAD is getting there. Snappier than Solidworks, but the workflow layout needs some work. I am also looking at projects such as https://zoo.dev https://zoo.dev. In mapping the design 1to1 to code (while keeping gui workflow as well) I think they have a real chance of offering enough value that new companies will be interested in trying out their approach. It opens the doors to automation analysis, and generation that while possible with something like Solidworks is cumbersome and not well documented.

gosub100 8mo ago

No, wealth gets more concentrated. Fewer people on the team will be able to afford a comfortable lifestyle and save for retirement. More will edge infinitesimally closer to "barely scraping by".