8 ms·

[flagged]

by sph 6mo ago

[flagged]

cstrahan 6mo ago
That seems like an odd way to interpret what they wrote. Imagine old school machinists saying to a CNC machinist “Ha! See, maybe you don’t jog the axes manually, but you still have to be involved in placing the stock material, and you have to do the CAD/CAM work - so did it really machine the part for you? No!” AI is a tool like any other. It has its limitations. It has classes of problems that it is suited to handle, and others it isn’t. If it’s true that they haven’t written (as in “typed out by hand”) a single line of code, why can’t they say that without you making that statement into more than it is? I haven’t written a single line of code in 6 months, and that’s simply fact. It is also true that I put in a lot of other work to make that feasible, but that work isn’t in the form of writing code. “it’s mature and the next step of engineering” Tautologically, it’s mature enough for what it is mature enough for, and it certainly is the next step in the same way that CNC was the next step for machining — if you’re not using it as a machinist, you’re going to produce less compared to those who are. Same thing with garden hoses. Yes, you can go fetch water from a lake and splash it on your lawn, or, you know, you could just use a sprinkler connected to your garden hose. Doesn’t replace buckets. Buckets just have a narrower scope in a world where garden hoses exist.
- hansmayer 6mo ago
  There is a reason why such discussions about CNC machines never happened. I wonder what it cculd be? Becausw their output is better than man-made atuff? Because they are reliable? Because their manufacturers generally don't lie?
  - yard2010 6mo ago
    [dead]
  - whattheheckheck 6mo ago
    Globally cnc machines are a little over $100billion. It also had a logical stopping point in automation tech. Ai is trying to do everything and wont stop
    - parineum 6mo ago
      > Ai is trying to do everything and wont stop Because it's a solution looking for a problem. All the AI companies lean in to coding because it actually helps with that to some degree but the amount that it helps doesn't justify their valuations. It needs to be good at everything to justify their target IPO price.
- jcgrillo 6mo ago
  I'm sorry but both of these are false equivalences. CNC isn't about making general machining operations faster or necessarily better. It's about making a single machine more versatile. Instead of needing an assembly line of machines you can get a bunch of different operations done on the same part without moving it to a different machine. You can also do compound operations that were otherwise highly specialized (like milling a turbocharger's radial compressor wheel). You can get the same job done with a series of manual operations though. A garden hose vs a bucket is also the same situation. You can accomplish the same thing with either, but one might be more labor intensive. AI is nothing like either of those. It would be like instead of a bucket you get a garden hose that points in a different direction every time you try to use it. Or instead of a 5 axis mill that rigorously executes the g-code it just randomly reinterprets tool paths each time it cuts a part. Both of these things would be worse than useless in their respective applications. AI is different because it plays to the pliability of the software domain. Even fairly shitty, irreproducible results can be good enough for software development, if you don't look at it too closely. Make analogies to the physical world at your peril!
  - autoexec 6mo ago
    > AI is nothing like either of those. It would be like instead of a bucket you get a garden hose that points in a different direction every time you try to use it. And also adds a multiplier to your water bill
    - wartywhoa23 6mo ago
      Seamlessly mutating to an exponent.
  - ozim 6mo ago
    If you let garden hose loose it will definitely spray all over the place given enough pressure. The same with AI you still have to hold it and point in direction to be useful.
deleted 6mo ago
[deleted]
vanuatu 6mo ago
[flagged]
- layer8 6mo ago
  RSI?
  - aix1 6mo ago
    Probably Recursive Self-Improvement
  - anon35 6mo ago
    Great example of what we used to call: "default definition changed". RSI 20 years ago = Repetitive Strain Injury RSI today: Recursive Self Improvement
    - hkt 6mo ago
      There's a rude but high quality joke waiting to be mined out of that transition
    - ashirviskas 6mo ago
      To me it is Relative Strenght Index
- microtonal 6mo ago
  What's up with all the new accounts astroturfing AI? There are multiple in these threads. People from the 'foundation model' companies having to keep up the AI hype? Usually they provide grandiose claims (like the top-level comment) without any evidence or just anecdotal evidence that is not verifiable.
  - Auracle 6mo ago
    Just what kind of evidence do you suppose they could have?
nurettin 6mo ago
There are more points of view than that on HN. A common one: "I have stopped writing code, the world is going to end" Another: "I will code by hand, I don't care" Another: "I use it as a tool, but the hype bothers me so much that I have to bitch and moan from morning to night" This one is: "I have stopped writing code, it wasn't the end of the world."
- magic_hamster 6mo ago
  My view is write the code that matters to you and that you want or need to be proficient with. If you need to defend, explain or discuss code, you are better off writing it yourself.
iLoveOncall 6mo ago
The vast majority of positive opinions about AI on Reddit and HackerNews are bots. The one you respond to is an obvious bot, new account only posting comments saying how great AI is for example. No need to look further.
armchairhacker 6mo ago
The Bun rewrite’s aftermath will provide strong evidence either for or against GP.
- scrollaway 6mo ago
  That’s like saying “the aftermath of Hiroshima will provide strong evidence either for or against nuclear power scientists”. It’s irrelevant and unrelated.
  - armchairhacker 6mo ago
    If nuclear power scientists claimed they had a bomb that could level an entire city, Hiroshima would prove them correct. vividfrier claims they haven’t written a line of code (implying other employees are similar), and their big company is operating normally. Bun is a big project and the rewrite is entirely LLM-generated. If its development continues normally, it reinforces the claim’s plausibility and proves someone made a large change (rewrite) entirely using AI. If not, it provides strong doubt: either vividfrier’s company is doing something different that avoids Bun’s problems (maybe other employees are still writing code manually), or they’re misleading or lying.
    - scrollaway 6mo ago
      The way it'll play out is, if nothing happens denialists will claim "nothing has happened YET!", and if anything happens, those same people will claim "you see, writing AI code is a terrible idea!". People write code differently, AI models write code differently, AI systems write code differently, companies create systems that write AI-written code differently, etc. The system that wrote Bun bears no relationship to the system that writes OP's code. Making such absolute statements about AI-written code is as dumb as making absolute statements about human-written code on the basis that it's "human-written".
      - armchairhacker 6mo ago
        Likewise, if anything happens, AI hypists will claim they used the tools wrong, just wait 6 months, etc. It's plausible that OP's company is succeeding with 100% AI-generated code, even if Bun fails, but it's also plausibly false. Anyone can claim anything on the internet, what separates BS from reality is evidence. I didn't write that Bun's rewrite absolutely proves or disproves OP's claim, I wrote that it provides evidence; it does, much more than OP's word. It's also plausible that OP's claim is true, but only because despite being in a "big tech" company, they've been working on small self-contained repos, throwaway scripts, etc. The implications of this would be much different than what their comment suggests, which is another reason evidence matters: it forces them to narrow their claim, because anyone can make an overzealous claim from a small example.
xyzal 6mo ago
I think discussion with open registration is doomed precisely for this reason, it is too open to being influenced by bad actors. Maybe the lobste.rs invitation model would be better ...
32as01 6mo ago
[flagged]
- solenoid0937 6mo ago
  Or he's just giving a sane take, one that most people in the Bay Area have by now. Lots of tech companies are doing just fine with purely AI written code at this point. Saying that the quality is getting worse in some immeasurable way (while incidents remain the same) is literally unfalsifiable.
  - vnaghra 6mo ago
    It is getting worse in a measurable way: 1) Since vibe coding GitHub has frequent outages and isn't able to load a large number of comments. 2) The slop translation of Bun resulted in immediate bugs (https://github.com/oven-sh/bun/issues/30719 https://github.com/oven-sh/bun/issues/30719) that the hyped Mythos apparently did not find. 3) AI features and (likely, though not proven) AI code resulted in a 0-day in Google code: https://projectzero.google/2026/01/pixel-0-click-part-1.html https://projectzero.google/2026/01/pixel-0-click-part-1.html The house of cards is beginning to collapse.
    - sebzim4500 6mo ago
      Maybe this is confirmation bias but I feel like Github has had terrible uptime since before LLMs were a thing.
    - foldr 6mo ago
      People started depending on GitHub more. Do people really think it was more reliable when it was a sprawling RoR app in 2010? (Not that there’s anything wrong with RoR; people just didn’t expect such high uptime back then.)
    - vividfrier 6mo ago
      [flagged]
  - armchairhacker 6mo ago
vividfrier 6mo ago
[flagged]
elif 6mo ago
I would say his post has the tone of earnest discourse while yours devolves into ad hominem laden reflexive sensitivity. Which is the pathological take?

[flagged]

by sph 6mo ago

[flagged]

That seems like an odd way to interpret what they wrote. Imagine old school machinists saying to a CNC machinist “Ha! See, maybe you don’t jog the axes manually, but you still have to be involved in placing the stock material, and you have to do the CAD/CAM work - so did it really machine the part for you? No!” AI is a tool like any other. It has its limitations. It has classes of problems that it is suited to handle, and others it isn’t. If it’s true that they haven’t written (as in “typed out by hand”) a single line of code, why can’t they say that without you making that statement into more than it is? I haven’t written a single line of code in 6 months, and that’s simply fact. It is also true that I put in a lot of other work to make that feasible, but that work isn’t in the form of writing code. “it’s mature and the next step of engineering” Tautologically, it’s mature enough for what it is mature enough for, and it certainly is the next step in the same way that CNC was the next step for machining — if you’re not using it as a machinist, you’re going to produce less compared to those who are. Same thing with garden hoses. Yes, you can go fetch water from a lake and splash it on your lawn, or, you know, you could just use a sprinkler connected to your garden hose. Doesn’t replace buckets. Buckets just have a narrower scope in a world where garden hoses exist.

hansmayer 6mo ago
There is a reason why such discussions about CNC machines never happened. I wonder what it cculd be? Becausw their output is better than man-made atuff? Because they are reliable? Because their manufacturers generally don't lie?
- yard2010 6mo ago
  [dead]
- whattheheckheck 6mo ago
  Globally cnc machines are a little over $100billion. It also had a logical stopping point in automation tech. Ai is trying to do everything and wont stop
  - parineum 6mo ago
    > Ai is trying to do everything and wont stop Because it's a solution looking for a problem. All the AI companies lean in to coding because it actually helps with that to some degree but the amount that it helps doesn't justify their valuations. It needs to be good at everything to justify their target IPO price.
jcgrillo 6mo ago
I'm sorry but both of these are false equivalences. CNC isn't about making general machining operations faster or necessarily better. It's about making a single machine more versatile. Instead of needing an assembly line of machines you can get a bunch of different operations done on the same part without moving it to a different machine. You can also do compound operations that were otherwise highly specialized (like milling a turbocharger's radial compressor wheel). You can get the same job done with a series of manual operations though. A garden hose vs a bucket is also the same situation. You can accomplish the same thing with either, but one might be more labor intensive. AI is nothing like either of those. It would be like instead of a bucket you get a garden hose that points in a different direction every time you try to use it. Or instead of a 5 axis mill that rigorously executes the g-code it just randomly reinterprets tool paths each time it cuts a part. Both of these things would be worse than useless in their respective applications. AI is different because it plays to the pliability of the software domain. Even fairly shitty, irreproducible results can be good enough for software development, if you don't look at it too closely. Make analogies to the physical world at your peril!
- autoexec 6mo ago
  > AI is nothing like either of those. It would be like instead of a bucket you get a garden hose that points in a different direction every time you try to use it. And also adds a multiplier to your water bill
  - wartywhoa23 6mo ago
    Seamlessly mutating to an exponent.
- ozim 6mo ago
  If you let garden hose loose it will definitely spray all over the place given enough pressure. The same with AI you still have to hold it and point in direction to be useful.

deleted 6mo ago

[deleted]

vanuatu 6mo ago

[flagged]

layer8 6mo ago
RSI?
- aix1 6mo ago
  Probably Recursive Self-Improvement
- anon35 6mo ago
  Great example of what we used to call: "default definition changed". RSI 20 years ago = Repetitive Strain Injury RSI today: Recursive Self Improvement
  - hkt 6mo ago
    There's a rude but high quality joke waiting to be mined out of that transition
  - ashirviskas 6mo ago
    To me it is Relative Strenght Index
microtonal 6mo ago
What's up with all the new accounts astroturfing AI? There are multiple in these threads. People from the 'foundation model' companies having to keep up the AI hype? Usually they provide grandiose claims (like the top-level comment) without any evidence or just anecdotal evidence that is not verifiable.
- Auracle 6mo ago
  Just what kind of evidence do you suppose they could have?

nurettin 6mo ago

There are more points of view than that on HN. A common one: "I have stopped writing code, the world is going to end" Another: "I will code by hand, I don't care" Another: "I use it as a tool, but the hype bothers me so much that I have to bitch and moan from morning to night" This one is: "I have stopped writing code, it wasn't the end of the world."

magic_hamster 6mo ago
My view is write the code that matters to you and that you want or need to be proficient with. If you need to defend, explain or discuss code, you are better off writing it yourself.

iLoveOncall 6mo ago

The vast majority of positive opinions about AI on Reddit and HackerNews are bots. The one you respond to is an obvious bot, new account only posting comments saying how great AI is for example. No need to look further.

armchairhacker 6mo ago

The Bun rewrite’s aftermath will provide strong evidence either for or against GP.

scrollaway 6mo ago
That’s like saying “the aftermath of Hiroshima will provide strong evidence either for or against nuclear power scientists”. It’s irrelevant and unrelated.
- armchairhacker 6mo ago
  If nuclear power scientists claimed they had a bomb that could level an entire city, Hiroshima would prove them correct. vividfrier claims they haven’t written a line of code (implying other employees are similar), and their big company is operating normally. Bun is a big project and the rewrite is entirely LLM-generated. If its development continues normally, it reinforces the claim’s plausibility and proves someone made a large change (rewrite) entirely using AI. If not, it provides strong doubt: either vividfrier’s company is doing something different that avoids Bun’s problems (maybe other employees are still writing code manually), or they’re misleading or lying.
  - scrollaway 6mo ago
    The way it'll play out is, if nothing happens denialists will claim "nothing has happened YET!", and if anything happens, those same people will claim "you see, writing AI code is a terrible idea!". People write code differently, AI models write code differently, AI systems write code differently, companies create systems that write AI-written code differently, etc. The system that wrote Bun bears no relationship to the system that writes OP's code. Making such absolute statements about AI-written code is as dumb as making absolute statements about human-written code on the basis that it's "human-written".
    - armchairhacker 6mo ago
      Likewise, if anything happens, AI hypists will claim they used the tools wrong, just wait 6 months, etc. It's plausible that OP's company is succeeding with 100% AI-generated code, even if Bun fails, but it's also plausibly false. Anyone can claim anything on the internet, what separates BS from reality is evidence. I didn't write that Bun's rewrite absolutely proves or disproves OP's claim, I wrote that it provides evidence; it does, much more than OP's word. It's also plausible that OP's claim is true, but only because despite being in a "big tech" company, they've been working on small self-contained repos, throwaway scripts, etc. The implications of this would be much different than what their comment suggests, which is another reason evidence matters: it forces them to narrow their claim, because anyone can make an overzealous claim from a small example.

xyzal 6mo ago

I think discussion with open registration is doomed precisely for this reason, it is too open to being influenced by bad actors. Maybe the lobste.rs invitation model would be better ...

32as01 6mo ago

[flagged]

solenoid0937 6mo ago
Or he's just giving a sane take, one that most people in the Bay Area have by now. Lots of tech companies are doing just fine with purely AI written code at this point. Saying that the quality is getting worse in some immeasurable way (while incidents remain the same) is literally unfalsifiable.
- vnaghra 6mo ago
  It is getting worse in a measurable way: 1) Since vibe coding GitHub has frequent outages and isn't able to load a large number of comments. 2) The slop translation of Bun resulted in immediate bugs (https://github.com/oven-sh/bun/issues/30719 https://github.com/oven-sh/bun/issues/30719) that the hyped Mythos apparently did not find. 3) AI features and (likely, though not proven) AI code resulted in a 0-day in Google code: https://projectzero.google/2026/01/pixel-0-click-part-1.html https://projectzero.google/2026/01/pixel-0-click-part-1.html The house of cards is beginning to collapse.
  - sebzim4500 6mo ago
    Maybe this is confirmation bias but I feel like Github has had terrible uptime since before LLMs were a thing.
  - foldr 6mo ago
    People started depending on GitHub more. Do people really think it was more reliable when it was a sprawling RoR app in 2010? (Not that there’s anything wrong with RoR; people just didn’t expect such high uptime back then.)
  - vividfrier 6mo ago
    [flagged]
- armchairhacker 6mo ago

vividfrier 6mo ago

[flagged]

elif 6mo ago

I would say his post has the tone of earnest discourse while yours devolves into ad hominem laden reflexive sensitivity. Which is the pathological take?