4 ms·

> But no need to wait. At a high level, Gas City is the answer to all your problems. Ha! At least, for certain classes of problem, such as, “How can I bring AI

> But no need to wait. At a high level, Gas City is the answer to all your problems. Ha! At least, for certain classes of problem, such as, “How can I bring AI into my company and pass an audit trail,” The important audit at my company is conducted by the FDA. I have a feeling when they ask what processes we followed to mitigate any user harm that could be caused by software changes that "I told an AI-mayor in the form of a cartoon fox what to do and he spit out a bunch of vibecode software written by AI-driven virtual cartoon characters" is not among the answers they want to hear.

siva7 6mo ago
Not yet... but me in 2020 telling you what the HN frontpage 2026 would look like you would have sent me to a mental institution, wouldn't you?
- throwup238 6mo ago
  Same institution I’d send Steve today. The sanatorium from American Horror Story Asylum comes to mind. Dominique, nique, nique…
  - Quarrelsome 6mo ago
    we can do better than "that man is crazy". Why not pull up a line in his OPENLY AVAILABLE CODE BASE and mock that instead?
    - throwup238 6mo ago
      Beads, his glorified CLI based work tracker, was over several hundred thousand lines of code, last I checked in January. Where do I even begin to mock that except at the source? That’s just absolute insanity.
      - Quarrelsome 6mo ago
        [flagged]
        throwup238 6mo ago
        > If its all obviously shit then it shouldn't be that hard. Maybe point Claude at it and ask it to find stupid stuff. What does that even mean? Am I supposed to point Claude at garbage code bases? All it will find is garbage. > My point is that just calling him names has no substance, but mocking his source specifically does. He is the source. He wrote this stuff under his own volition.
        Quarrelsome 6mo ago
        We're supposed to be engineers. Criticising a concept based on conjecture and insult is unbecoming of our culture.
        deleted 6mo ago
        [deleted]
        throwup238 6mo ago
        > We're supposed to be engineers. Criticising a concept based on conjecture and insult is unbecoming of our culture. The entire thing is nothing but conjecture. No real software has been produced by the concept to date, except more garbage software that takes hundreds of thousands of lines where a few thousand would do. And to be clear, Beads and Gastown are unbecoming of our “culture” and any self respecting engineer would recoil in horror at the concept.
        Quarrelsome 6mo ago
        How is it conjecture when you just admitted you're aware of a repo with hundreds of thousands of lines of code. Your argument belies a lazyness or skill issue. You abandon the possibility of proof to sling mud. People have made a shit ton of economic value with shit code over the course of history of software and now that's accelerating with this sort of shite. I appreciate its ugly but i will not follow you by fashioning a duvet out of arrogance and throwing rocks people investigating the ugly. What they're doing it at least an interesting spectacle and ill wait for the show to end before writing my review.
    - underarm5717 6mo ago
      [dead]
      - Uhhrrr 6mo ago
        If you actually follow the links you posted, you will see that he didn't create a meme coin and didn't rug pull it. Someone else made the coin and set it up so he got transfer fees.
  - DonHopkins 6mo ago
    [dead]
- Avshalom 6mo ago
  "every 5th article is about no-code-solutions that sometimes work" might be unexpected but it's hardly the stuff of institutionalization.
  - coldtea 6mo ago
    Among the general population, no. Among a population of coders, it should be the stuff of institutionalization.
- deleted 6mo ago
  [deleted]
avaer 6mo ago
Keep in mind investing in cartoon foxes was a "business strategy" a lot of (otherwise serious) people bought into in 2020-2021. And those cartoon foxes didn't even do anything! I guess these ones do? Don't put it past the masses. These are crazy times.
- cdata 6mo ago
  The influence of cartoon foxes on business strategies in tech has a long history and cannot be overstated. https://poignant.guide/book/chapter-3.html https://poignant.guide/book/chapter-3.html
Quarrelsome 6mo ago
I did an induction at some ISO certified company some years back, reading their docs. A good 50% of them contained significant content that basically read: > the thing must be in the place where it should be With no further information e.g. what place, where, how, when, who facilitates that? > the person who facilitates it, is the person who facilitates it. Yea thanks. So their ISO accredited process was basically no process. Would have been way better with a talking fox. So I feel like humans are capable of just as bad. I'd be interested in what answer the Fox could spit out and I kinda wonder where it might fit on the bell curve of all non Gas-Town "auditable" processes. I'm all for skepticism but I feel like it would be more tangible if we instead criticised the response instead of just conjuring it as "definitely awful" because it happens to be on top of a generated stack. I mean: I don't want it to work, but maybe we're not as good as we think we are, or the stuff we rate as super important is actually way less important with a generated context. As much as I love good code, the thought that gnaws at the back of my head is the truism that some of the most profitable code in history has been some of the "worst" code (e.g. MySpace's janky code base ontop of ColdFusion or Twitter's "Fail Whale" era). So I'm happy that someone is exploring this space in an open way. I'm just glad I'm not the one finding that out with my face first.
- vidarh 6mo ago
  Which ISO certification matters, but the key thing people should be aware of is that the primary value of the certification to customers is that your processes are documented and that deviations are tracked, so that customers can check whether the processes makes sense before signing a contract. It's important not to expect the certification itself to guarantee quality.
cma 6mo ago
> The important audit at my company is conducted by [Trump's second term] FDA. Could work
zactato 6mo ago
Ehhh in my experience compliance auditors are 10 behind the cutting edge. I still see auditors that don't understand Kubernetes and so ask the same questions they would about on prem machines. They don't know the questions to ask to get to the real meat of the risks. This leads them to allow things through that probably deserve more scrutiny. I bet the same thing will happen with LLM tools like this. They'll just ask if you use PRs and wave you on through.

siva7 6mo ago

Not yet... but me in 2020 telling you what the HN frontpage 2026 would look like you would have sent me to a mental institution, wouldn't you?

throwup238 6mo ago
Same institution I’d send Steve today. The sanatorium from American Horror Story Asylum comes to mind. Dominique, nique, nique…
- Quarrelsome 6mo ago
  we can do better than "that man is crazy". Why not pull up a line in his OPENLY AVAILABLE CODE BASE and mock that instead?
  - throwup238 6mo ago
    Beads, his glorified CLI based work tracker, was over several hundred thousand lines of code, last I checked in January. Where do I even begin to mock that except at the source? That’s just absolute insanity.
    - Quarrelsome 6mo ago
      [flagged]
      - throwup238 6mo ago
        > If its all obviously shit then it shouldn't be that hard. Maybe point Claude at it and ask it to find stupid stuff. What does that even mean? Am I supposed to point Claude at garbage code bases? All it will find is garbage. > My point is that just calling him names has no substance, but mocking his source specifically does. He is the source. He wrote this stuff under his own volition.
        Quarrelsome 6mo ago
        We're supposed to be engineers. Criticising a concept based on conjecture and insult is unbecoming of our culture.
        deleted 6mo ago
        [deleted]
        throwup238 6mo ago
        > We're supposed to be engineers. Criticising a concept based on conjecture and insult is unbecoming of our culture. The entire thing is nothing but conjecture. No real software has been produced by the concept to date, except more garbage software that takes hundreds of thousands of lines where a few thousand would do. And to be clear, Beads and Gastown are unbecoming of our “culture” and any self respecting engineer would recoil in horror at the concept.
        Quarrelsome 6mo ago
        How is it conjecture when you just admitted you're aware of a repo with hundreds of thousands of lines of code. Your argument belies a lazyness or skill issue. You abandon the possibility of proof to sling mud. People have made a shit ton of economic value with shit code over the course of history of software and now that's accelerating with this sort of shite. I appreciate its ugly but i will not follow you by fashioning a duvet out of arrogance and throwing rocks people investigating the ugly. What they're doing it at least an interesting spectacle and ill wait for the show to end before writing my review.
  - underarm5717 6mo ago
    [dead]
    - Uhhrrr 6mo ago
      If you actually follow the links you posted, you will see that he didn't create a meme coin and didn't rug pull it. Someone else made the coin and set it up so he got transfer fees.
- DonHopkins 6mo ago
  [dead]
Avshalom 6mo ago
"every 5th article is about no-code-solutions that sometimes work" might be unexpected but it's hardly the stuff of institutionalization.
- coldtea 6mo ago
  Among the general population, no. Among a population of coders, it should be the stuff of institutionalization.
deleted 6mo ago
[deleted]

avaer 6mo ago

Keep in mind investing in cartoon foxes was a "business strategy" a lot of (otherwise serious) people bought into in 2020-2021. And those cartoon foxes didn't even do anything! I guess these ones do? Don't put it past the masses. These are crazy times.

cdata 6mo ago
The influence of cartoon foxes on business strategies in tech has a long history and cannot be overstated. https://poignant.guide/book/chapter-3.html https://poignant.guide/book/chapter-3.html

Quarrelsome 6mo ago

I did an induction at some ISO certified company some years back, reading their docs. A good 50% of them contained significant content that basically read: > the thing must be in the place where it should be With no further information e.g. what place, where, how, when, who facilitates that? > the person who facilitates it, is the person who facilitates it. Yea thanks. So their ISO accredited process was basically no process. Would have been way better with a talking fox. So I feel like humans are capable of just as bad. I'd be interested in what answer the Fox could spit out and I kinda wonder where it might fit on the bell curve of all non Gas-Town "auditable" processes. I'm all for skepticism but I feel like it would be more tangible if we instead criticised the response instead of just conjuring it as "definitely awful" because it happens to be on top of a generated stack. I mean: I don't want it to work, but maybe we're not as good as we think we are, or the stuff we rate as super important is actually way less important with a generated context. As much as I love good code, the thought that gnaws at the back of my head is the truism that some of the most profitable code in history has been some of the "worst" code (e.g. MySpace's janky code base ontop of ColdFusion or Twitter's "Fail Whale" era). So I'm happy that someone is exploring this space in an open way. I'm just glad I'm not the one finding that out with my face first.

vidarh 6mo ago
Which ISO certification matters, but the key thing people should be aware of is that the primary value of the certification to customers is that your processes are documented and that deviations are tracked, so that customers can check whether the processes makes sense before signing a contract. It's important not to expect the certification itself to guarantee quality.

cma 6mo ago

> The important audit at my company is conducted by [Trump's second term] FDA. Could work

zactato 6mo ago

Ehhh in my experience compliance auditors are 10 behind the cutting edge. I still see auditors that don't understand Kubernetes and so ask the same questions they would about on prem machines. They don't know the questions to ask to get to the real meat of the risks. This leads them to allow things through that probably deserve more scrutiny. I bet the same thing will happen with LLM tools like this. They'll just ask if you use PRs and wave you on through.