3 ms·

If I was maintaining such a boutique implementation I could probably do without AI as well, sans the moral high ground posting.

raverbashing 1mo ago
Yeah. What do they want, a golden star next to their name? This is the kind of posturing that leads nowhere. If you're concerned about resource usage then use an open model locally
- lacunary 1mo ago
  Why would an open local model use less resources?
  - tonis2 1mo ago
    You don't usually cool local GPU's with community water and you don't need to cut down trees to create room for data-center. I would love that local AI's, would be good enough for my coding demands, but so far It's not there yet for me.
    - simonw 1mo ago
      I expect the energy usage of a thousand people all running their own local models is significantly less efficient than those same people sharing a model hosted in a data center.
- infinite_spin 1mo ago
  My advice: let these people think what they want, it reduces competition in an already saturated market
olmo23 1mo ago
To put it bluntly: this particular product category is now an afternoon's vibe-coding project for one person. The result would be worse code, probably. Also probably still good enough.
- mojuba 1mo ago
  > The result would be worse code, probably. Also probably still good enough. And that's because the definition of "good enough" is drifting towards "crappy", has been for decades, now accelerated by the AI. Was thinking the other day how the bars of quality for software pre-Internet was so much higher just because any small software shop only ever had one shot: ship your software on floppy disks, with practically no chance to patch and fix bugs later. People either like your 1.0 or they don't and that's your whole business story. Then came the Internet, bug fix updates became so much easier, and with it came crappification and bugs-as-a-norm attitude. And now this. Not whining, just stating the facts.
  - remus 1mo ago
    > And that's because the definition of "good enough" is drifting towards "crappy", has been for decades, now accelerated by the AI. Interestingly I have found the opposite in the software I write. LLMs make it so easy to get the basics in place that I spend the time on the details and polish.
    - mojuba 1mo ago
      Are you measuring the number of bugs per line of code in production, compared to pre-AI? That's the metric.
      - remus 1mo ago
        Nothing so scientific. Im just having a lot of fun using the software I write with LLMs because I can easily add polish and build things I didnt have time for before.
- archagon 1mo ago
  Ah yes, just want I want, slopcoded dev tools by people who don’t understand what the fuck they’re doing and who will drop support the moment their agents hit some minor issue.

raverbashing 1mo ago

Yeah. What do they want, a golden star next to their name? This is the kind of posturing that leads nowhere. If you're concerned about resource usage then use an open model locally

lacunary 1mo ago
Why would an open local model use less resources?
- tonis2 1mo ago
  You don't usually cool local GPU's with community water and you don't need to cut down trees to create room for data-center. I would love that local AI's, would be good enough for my coding demands, but so far It's not there yet for me.
  - simonw 1mo ago
    I expect the energy usage of a thousand people all running their own local models is significantly less efficient than those same people sharing a model hosted in a data center.
infinite_spin 1mo ago
My advice: let these people think what they want, it reduces competition in an already saturated market

olmo23 1mo ago

To put it bluntly: this particular product category is now an afternoon's vibe-coding project for one person. The result would be worse code, probably. Also probably still good enough.

mojuba 1mo ago
> The result would be worse code, probably. Also probably still good enough. And that's because the definition of "good enough" is drifting towards "crappy", has been for decades, now accelerated by the AI. Was thinking the other day how the bars of quality for software pre-Internet was so much higher just because any small software shop only ever had one shot: ship your software on floppy disks, with practically no chance to patch and fix bugs later. People either like your 1.0 or they don't and that's your whole business story. Then came the Internet, bug fix updates became so much easier, and with it came crappification and bugs-as-a-norm attitude. And now this. Not whining, just stating the facts.
- remus 1mo ago
  > And that's because the definition of "good enough" is drifting towards "crappy", has been for decades, now accelerated by the AI. Interestingly I have found the opposite in the software I write. LLMs make it so easy to get the basics in place that I spend the time on the details and polish.
  - mojuba 1mo ago
    Are you measuring the number of bugs per line of code in production, compared to pre-AI? That's the metric.
    - remus 1mo ago
      Nothing so scientific. Im just having a lot of fun using the software I write with LLMs because I can easily add polish and build things I didnt have time for before.
archagon 1mo ago
Ah yes, just want I want, slopcoded dev tools by people who don’t understand what the fuck they’re doing and who will drop support the moment their agents hit some minor issue.