4 ms·
This is a great take. It applies the SaaS is dead theory at a lower level (libraries are dead) but has it a much more nuanced view. Yeh even if LLMs are 10x be
by jascha_eng 8mo ago
This is a great take. It applies the SaaS is dead theory at a lower level (libraries are dead) but has it a much more nuanced view.
Yeh even if LLMs are 10x better than today you probably still don't want to implement cryptography from scratch, but use a library.
I also like the 3d printing analogy. We will see how good LLMs get, but I will say that a lot of AI coded tools today have the same feeling as 3d printed hardware.
If no engineer was involved the software is cheap and breaks under pressure because no one considered the edge cases. It looks good on the surface but if you use it for something serious it does break.
The engineer might still use an LLM/3d printer but where necessary he'll use a metal connection (write code by hand or at least tightly guide the LLM) to make the product sturdy.
- lelanthran 8mo ago> It looks good on the surface but if you use it for something serious it does break. That's LLMs extending C and C++ Undefined Behaviour to every project regardless of language. ------------------- EDIT: I tried articulating it in a blog post in a sleep-deprived frenzy of writing on Sunday - https://www.lelanthran.com/chap14/content.html https://www.lelanthran.com/chap14/content.html
- mikert89 8mo agoThe time might come when the ai just writes things like http request parsers and crypto libraries on the fly. And it will be somewhat normal
- kristjansson 8mo agoWh … why would we want that?
- feastingonslop 8mo agoWhy would you not?
- thesmtsolver2 8mo agoLibraries are more well tested. Unless you "regurgitate code in a library" as "not importing any libraries".
- feastingonslop 8mo agoWhat value is there in tested code when you have the option of superlative, flawless code?
- kristjansson 8mo agoHow do you determine flawlessness? How you even approximate a guarantee of it? To what specification is flawlessness judged, and can you precisely and completely relay that spec to your friendly local robot more efficiently than it can vendor / import existing libraries?
- mikert89 8mo agoIt’ll just spit the code out. I vibe coded some with cookie handling the other day that worked. Should I have done it? Nope. But the ai did it and I allowed it The concept of using a library for everything will become outdated
- thesmtsolver2 8mo agoWhat is the advantage of coding something from scratch vs importing a well tested library?
- feastingonslop 8mo agoIf the LLM writes better code (and it will) then its code should be favored over a library.
- mikert89 8mo agoPeople aren’t mentally prepared for the LLMs spitting out flawless code
- yoyohello13 8mo agoBecause it’s not a forgone conclusion that it’s going to happen in our lifetime.
- michaelmrose 8mo agoEither you didn't need a library for that or you could have vibe coded it using the library even easier.
- mikert89 8mo agoIt read the library and created a custom implementation for my use case. The implementation was interoperable with a popular nextjs with library. It was a hack sure, but it also took me three minutes
- 8mo ago
- majormajor 8mo agoThis seems like today's version of "I could write Facebook in a weekend." What are the incentives for doing that? What are the incentives for everyone else to move? So if proven things exist for basics, what's the incentive to not use them? If everyone decides they're too heavy, they could make and publish new libraries and tools would pick those up. And since they're old, the feature-set is probably more nuanced than you expect. YAGNI is a motto for doing less to avoid creating code debt, but writing more net new code to avoid using a stable and proven library doesn't fit that.
- mikert89 8mo agoImporting a library for everything will become a dated concept. Similar to the idea that object relational mappers might go away if the ai can just write ultra complicated hyper efficient sql for every query
- majormajor 8mo agoORMs have largely been fading away for a while because there are real wins of not using them. Hyper-optimized HTTP request/response parsing? Yawn. Far less interesting. AFAICT, the advantages of keeping context tight and focused have not gone away. So there would neeed to be pretty interesting advantages to not just doing the easy thing. Build times too. I kinda doubt you're setting up strictly-modularized and tightly-controlled bazel builds for all your stuff to avoid extra recompilation... so why are we overcomplicating the easy stuff? Just because "it will probably function just as well"? "leftpad"-level library inanity? Sure, even less need than before (there was never much). Substantial libraries? What's the point? Hell, some of the most-used heavily-AI-coded software is going the opposite direction and jumping through hoops to keep using web libraries for UI even though they're terminal apps.
- sixtram 8mo agoWhy does the AI need SQL queries? Who needs that? It will just write its own ACID-compliant database with its own language, and while it's at it, reinvent the operating system as well. It's turtles all the way down.
- yoyohello13 8mo agoBut why? Even if you could have an AI do that it’s, if anything, a waste of cpu cycles. If you have a battle tested library that works and has been tested for trillions of request cycles why would you even want to write a new one that needs testing and maintenance? No matter how cheap code gen gets it doesn’t make sense. For something like a UI library, sure build something specific to your needs.
- mikert89 8mo agoLibraries are really built for human beings, not super intelligent machines. ORMs are built because I don’t like to and can’t write complex sql with every edge case. Same with a lot of software, software libraries are designed to work with the deficiencies of the human mind. There’s no reason to think ai needs these libraries in the same way
- agumonkey 8mo agoI agree with part of this (see my comment above). That said our limitations were also how we produced mathematics. Categorizing world into fixed concepts is valuable i'd say.
- yoyohello13 8mo agoEven in your scenario LLMs could write super optimized libraries (not intended by for humans) to do common tasks and share the code between them. I’m not saying the future can’t get to an ai just producing everything. I’m saying it’s just plain inefficient to keep solving the same problem over and over.
- heavyset_go 8mo agoI was assured manufacturing was dead because we'd all be 3D printing everything we need in our garages.
- dottedmag 8mo ago(Author here) I'm actually talking in the article why it hasn't happened.
- agumonkey 8mo agoWhich is the reverse of how humans design things, layers, modules. LLMs act as generalized compilers. Impressive but at the same time you end up with a static-like bunch of files instead of a system of parts (that said I'm not a great user of llms so maybe people managed to produce proto-frameworks with them, or maybe that will be the next phase.. module-oriented llm training).