askonomm

Sure sounds like it. CSS-in-JS in general is a horrid idea, having to wait for JS to load in order for the site to render any of its styles. In general I find it strange how actively hostile to the end-user so many of the modern front-end practices are. The very people whose job it is to create interactive experiences for users seem to really want the users to not have a good time.

In USA*

Many other countries have proper multi-year colleges specifically for the field of policing, and rigorous physical and mental health tests required to get the job. In those countries the police is more educated and more competent than the vast majority of the population.

Master development in a few days? Unless you are mastering something extremely basic like, I don't know, WordPress websites, I highly doubt that. Learning how to do proper architecture and various test systems requires a lot of critical thinking skill that comes with experience far longer than a couple of days, unless you are just a meat proxy for AI, and adapt AI's opinion as your own, with no critical thinking applied?

Pretty sure that was just for marketing.

Half the security stuff AI seems to "find" for me have been complete fabrications, with the other half that it says is "critical", but has actually been so minor that you'd basically have to have access to my own computer to "hack it". So, yes, it is much better at findings issues, too bad most of it seems to be made up.

For personal projects that's fine, but I'd absolutely hate to work with someone who is rolling their own libs for everything, and then when they leave the company puts an enormous amount of tech debt into our hands. It also really doesn't make for good team-work if a developer always forces their own opinion on everything.

Yup I can see that. My PC games always have a lot more issues and glitches than any of my PS5 games have had.

Yeah well HN is predominantly for and by American audiences I think and that already explains a lot of the attitude towards non-USA. A lot of Americans seem to think they are the main character in every story, and even if they are not, they try their best to somehow alter the narrative until they are.

Being happy or not has nothing to do with it, in my understanding as well. Removing full system access from non-deterministic tools prone to prompt injections seems like the most obvious thing to do. There's a reason I run all my projects in rootless isolated containers these days. There has never really been "trust" in software, but the lack of trust is a lot more obvious these days.

Yeah in Estonia we literally have robots deliver food (starship).

Yup I agree. I do think that all the low(er) skilled software jobs will disappear. Those mostly working on marketing websites or simpler CRUD apps. And if they don't disappear, they will just not need nearly as many people for those anymore. But those jobs were mostly about writing code, i.e translating a Jira ticket to reality, and that's not really "engineering" as such, so if your only marketable skill was knowing how to turn English (Jira) into Syntax (Code), then yeah, better start upskilling fast.

Ah yes, American Exceptionalism. USA is the best and that's why they reserve the right to the word America. And also to Greenland. And Cuba. Probably Venezuela. Middle-east. Hmm...

USA is trademarking the word "America"? Will South, central and non-USA parts of North America soon have to pay a license fee?

Like I mentioned here elsewhere: AI replaces the IDE/editor, not the thinking. We now just work one abstraction level higher, but your ability to architect solutions is as relevant, if not more so, than ever before. I design test cases, architectural plans, review the output, do verification. AI just writes the code and helps me with research. If your job can be entirely offloaded to AI then I’d question if your job was that needed to begin with, but writing code was never the job, engineering was. These are just tools to do the job with, they aren’t the job itself.

We solve business problems through technology and to me it’s quite concerning how many developers think their job was knowing syntax of a particular language. Nobody besides themselves care about the syntax of a particular language, certainly the business doesn’t care. I question if retaining your knowledge of programming languages is that important anymore, but your ability to read code if needed (after all, most programming languages are quite similar so it’s not that hard), do architectural and systems thinking, yes. More than ever before.

Honestly, the fear-mongering around AI replacing developers seems to really just expose the developers who never learned architectural and systems thinking, and were just translating Jira tickets to code. While I do not wish job loss upon anyone, I’m not very surprised if those types of jobs will disappear.

If that's how you create software then you belong to the lazy and incompetent group in my book. I provide AI with valuable context such as code coverage information, architecture analysis, test requirements, important "gotcha's" that a competent engineer would know about in their architecture or system etc. I'm still very much the person who comes up with the solutions. For me AI is replacing the code editor, it's not replacing the thinking.

What I've found is that AI allows lazy and incompetent developers to be more lazy and more incompetent. This then has the effect that product quality suffers more, faster. As a result of the sheer amount of code now being pushed out, code reviews, a thing that previously somewhat prevented lazy and incompetent developers from pushing out horrible code, is effectively dead in the water since no human can actually review such amounts of code realistically anymore. Some companies have adopted AI to review code, which, well ... you have AI make code, AI review code ... I hope you can see the stupidity here if you expect to see any deterministic results at all.

I guess time will tell if the consumer will adapt to the lower quality of products, allowing companies to justify the existence of lazy and incompetent developers, or if the consumer will push back, forcing companies to increase the quality of their developers.

Note: I use AI every day and it is entirely possible to create high quality software with it, so long as you are not lazy and incompetent.

I highly doubt that version is true, though he likes to repeat it. If he doesn't like WP Engine eating his market share while giving little back (they did give back, just apparently not enough, whatever that even means in a volunteer ran open source project) then he would've not responded by pulling his own contributions off of WP.org as well, stealing their plugins, banning their developers, and so forth. Like, what even is that? You don't want to play in my sandbox according the rules that I set so I won't play in my own sandbox either? Not to mention that if there's anyone doing monopolization in the WP world, it's Matt himself, by buying up basically every WP company there is.

His so-called "democratize publishing" persona is just a complete facade.

So what if this person gets mugged? They've probably been mugged multiple times before already! Thus, any future mugging is also totally fine!

HN truly is a wild place in that I don't know other forums where psychopaths are celebrated.

Yes you're right, that's my bad. I interpreted the "audiovisual" wrong. They are actually just monitoring the screen and system audio.

I mean things like:

- Not listening to user feedback for years until people started leaving the OS, at which point they started "listening" to add back things like taskbar location changing, things that were present in previous Windows versions. Also seems like every update breaks stuff, they clearly don't care about testing the stuff they put out.

- Every keystroke or button you click on Windows sends telemetry to their ad partners. Probably same on all their other products, too

- Built-in ads on PAID products

- Spying on everything you do with things like Windows Copilot and Recall

- Filing patents to monitor your activities to show ads, black mirror style

- Force-feeding their own agenda to their users instead of listening what users want (look what they did to Github after buying it)

- Their own Edge browser is horrendous spyware. If you go and download Google Chrome, it will tell you with a popup that Edge is better and you shouldn't download Chrome. Not to mention that many screens of dark pattern popup you have to "yes|later" before you can even use the browser

And the list goes on. Honestly I don't know if they've done anything user-centric in recent memory at all. And if they have, it's usually only because the media has villainized them to the point where their PR team says they can no longer ignore it. They don't seem to ever proactively care about their users, only retroactively when abusing their users has crossed some public line.

> just because they take a patent on something doesn't mean they will actually use it.

That's true, of course, but the fact that there are people in the company thinking like that to begin with, enough to think it's worth patenting such anti-human stuff, is plenty enough for me to never want anything to do with them.

Pretty much anything Microsoft does, for example.

Well of course I wouldn't expect corporations to know what ethics or human decency is even if it stared them straight into the eyes, but I would expect governments to establish laws and regulations such that the psychopaths wouldn't be able to abuse people to no end.

Any move away from the abusive big tech that exists in USA is a good move in my book. Microsoft just recently made a new patent where they will monitor you via camera and microphone to block your program/game to show you ads, and per ads viewed, you then earn credit to be able to use your program/game. It is absolutely wild to me how a corporation can be so toxic and abusive to its users and still be in business.

Sounds like just about every other system in modern capitalism.

I agree with the work changing more towards verification, but if the verification is one LLM reviewing another one, then that isn't really verification. At best you "assume", but you don't "verify".

Unfortunately I see a lot of (senior as well) engineers who think that just a vanilla LLM reviewing another LLM is sufficient, and my comment was directed towards those. If however you see the LLM era as needing more test support and systems than ever before in the form E2E tests and so forth, where "code review" as such becomes mostly irrelevant as you have such a strong test system in place that if that passes you can be sure it doesn't break anything for users, then yes, that's good.

Wait so you got rid of Apple because its baked in AI, and went with Omarchy that is also fully vibe coded and has baked in AI? Furthermore it has built-in ads for the products of DHH, such as Basecamp. Omarchy feels a lot like Windows, with it being slopped together and with built-in ads for products.

Personally I'm starting to see less and less "smart" people here, given how easily and quickly everyone jumps on random hype trains with very little investigation or thought put into it. And those who do investigate and put thought into it are then quickly down voted for being a hater. This forum has turned into almost like a FOMO echo chamber in a way.

Using an LLM to review the correctness of the work done by an LLM and expecting deterministic results must be some new definition of insanity.