3 ms·

My (arguably not very directly communicated, true) actual point is that "weird" is a term that is not really suited for tool choices like this. "Weird" is a so

by hypfer 11d ago

My (arguably not very directly communicated, true) actual point is that "weird" is a term that is not really suited for tool choices like this. "Weird" is a social concept. It's an artifact that has its roots in social cohesion and friction induced by individual nodes to glue the group together. Software development otoh is an engineering discipline (or.. it should be). And Engineering does not use the local social consensus algorithm for determining correctness. (or.. it should not)

aurareturn 11d ago
Software can be an engineering discipline doesn't change whether it's a human doing it or AI doing it. Arguably engineering is something AI should be really good at since you're just trying to compute a working product given constraints, formulas, resources.
- hypfer 11d ago
  What are you replying to? Evidently not the content of my comment. Where in the comment tree is this supposed to sit?
  - aurareturn 11d ago
    This one: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49708981 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49708981
Dfiesl 11d ago
I think they just meant its weird as in if you met a software dev at a dinner party who was still writing all their code by hand it would raise an eyebrow and you’d want to enquire further why that is.
- hypfer 11d ago
  I think understand the purpose of this comment. I think you're sensing friction and you'd like to reduce that by explaining for the other guy. Which is a common social script, but one that is being exploited here I'd say. But, regardless, what is interesting I think is the scenario chosen there. Because a "dinner party" is not where engineering happens; and that's kinda the point I was getting at. That's pulled from the pool of "social consensus" and not "math" or "physics" or whatever. It's interesting, isn't it? Just like how specific tokens in the context window of LLMs pull probabilities towards specific clusters of ideas (and tokens); with humans, you see similar things happen. (This comment is more coherent than it might look at at first sight.) ___ Anyway, point (and to the point) is: Don't get hacked by the current thing fraudsters/grifters. They don't respect you or me or really anyone the slightest. They're just in it to get rich quick (or simply just inflict psychological damage for sadistic reasons), and they will use any means necessary to do so. This comment chain only exists because some hype guy is trying to induce FOMO into people for not doing more AI. Why is unclear, but it's clearly malicious. Whether they consciously know that they are doing that doesn't matter for that assessment.
  - LeTeutz 11d ago
    what
    - hypfer 11d ago
      Yes, exactly. Let me try another analogy: AI-related comment sections are like a watering hole for both get-rich-quick grifters, but also bad people wanting to hurt others. The technology is so disruptive that there are all sorts of opportunities while stuff is still developing, things aren't regulated, and people themselves have not yet learned how to self-regulate. So if you're looking to make money or to just inflict pain onto others, you're pulled towards this stuff. This is what I am seeing in this specific comment sub-tree. A troll. But in current year, you cannot just call people trolls, so instead you get these elaborate meta comments that bypass the anti-anti-troll defenses, but get so abstract, people just go "what". My advice would be to view any of these comment sections through a zero-trust lens. Godspeed. We will all eventually get through this.
  - Dfiesl 11d ago
    I think LLMs just allow you to get to where you want to get to quicker. So in a productivity oriented world it seems weird to not be making use of them where those gains can be had.
    - hypfer 11d ago
      Yes, please stop trying to drag the conversation back into default "AI good/AI bad" scripts. It was not about that. Thank you.
sothatsit 11d ago
Maybe "unusual" or "uncommon" would be better terms here. I definitely wouldn't put it at 99% of developers, but I'd say it is the norm among developers I know that agents are their primary mode of writing code now (still using IDEs and GitHub to review changes).

by hypfer 11d ago

aurareturn 11d ago

Software can be an engineering discipline doesn't change whether it's a human doing it or AI doing it. Arguably engineering is something AI should be really good at since you're just trying to compute a working product given constraints, formulas, resources.

hypfer 11d ago
What are you replying to? Evidently not the content of my comment. Where in the comment tree is this supposed to sit?
- aurareturn 11d ago
  This one: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49708981 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49708981

Dfiesl 11d ago

I think they just meant its weird as in if you met a software dev at a dinner party who was still writing all their code by hand it would raise an eyebrow and you’d want to enquire further why that is.

hypfer 11d ago
I think understand the purpose of this comment. I think you're sensing friction and you'd like to reduce that by explaining for the other guy. Which is a common social script, but one that is being exploited here I'd say. But, regardless, what is interesting I think is the scenario chosen there. Because a "dinner party" is not where engineering happens; and that's kinda the point I was getting at. That's pulled from the pool of "social consensus" and not "math" or "physics" or whatever. It's interesting, isn't it? Just like how specific tokens in the context window of LLMs pull probabilities towards specific clusters of ideas (and tokens); with humans, you see similar things happen. (This comment is more coherent than it might look at at first sight.) ___ Anyway, point (and to the point) is: Don't get hacked by the current thing fraudsters/grifters. They don't respect you or me or really anyone the slightest. They're just in it to get rich quick (or simply just inflict psychological damage for sadistic reasons), and they will use any means necessary to do so. This comment chain only exists because some hype guy is trying to induce FOMO into people for not doing more AI. Why is unclear, but it's clearly malicious. Whether they consciously know that they are doing that doesn't matter for that assessment.
- LeTeutz 11d ago
  what
  - hypfer 11d ago
    Yes, exactly. Let me try another analogy: AI-related comment sections are like a watering hole for both get-rich-quick grifters, but also bad people wanting to hurt others. The technology is so disruptive that there are all sorts of opportunities while stuff is still developing, things aren't regulated, and people themselves have not yet learned how to self-regulate. So if you're looking to make money or to just inflict pain onto others, you're pulled towards this stuff. This is what I am seeing in this specific comment sub-tree. A troll. But in current year, you cannot just call people trolls, so instead you get these elaborate meta comments that bypass the anti-anti-troll defenses, but get so abstract, people just go "what". My advice would be to view any of these comment sections through a zero-trust lens. Godspeed. We will all eventually get through this.
- Dfiesl 11d ago
  I think LLMs just allow you to get to where you want to get to quicker. So in a productivity oriented world it seems weird to not be making use of them where those gains can be had.
  - hypfer 11d ago
    Yes, please stop trying to drag the conversation back into default "AI good/AI bad" scripts. It was not about that. Thank you.

sothatsit 11d ago

Maybe "unusual" or "uncommon" would be better terms here. I definitely wouldn't put it at 99% of developers, but I'd say it is the norm among developers I know that agents are their primary mode of writing code now (still using IDEs and GitHub to review changes).