mikert89

Its so much easier to create production quality software

only on HN do people call what is basically AGI, a vc funded bubble

claude code can do this, natively without a custom implementation

you are completely delusional about whats about to happen, hope you have some money saved up

divulging what? its not far from taking a screenshot and generating a backend. which will probably be possible some time in 2027, and is mostly possible now. the moat on software is gone for people that know how to use the tooling

we are no where near the limits of models with regards to software

the time is coming when you can take screenshots of an app and generate a full backend. we are no where near the limits of what we are about to see happen to software. idk whats legal, but its soon an irrelevant question

eventually you will be able to generate a database schema/api by just feeding saas app html to an llm. you wont get everything, but you will get close

I just restyled a full saas app thats doing 50k in arr per month, bootstrapped. I already shipped it to production. A major UX/element/component overhaul.

It looks 10x more professional. I did it this afternoon, sitting on my couch. I took a raw css/html assets from a very professional saas app, and gave it to claude code. I wrote no code, and did not even review the code. This field is truly on its way to full automation.

this is a completely false and outdated take, you can easily sell openai shares

unfortunately, google is better than ever

like half of engineers are vibe coding full time in their jobs, wake up

Software engineering will get automated, all of the issues with the current models will get worked out in time. People can beg and wish that its not true, but it is. We have a few more good years left and then this career is over

I read it when I was 15/16, along with "beyond good and evil" by nietzsche. I grew up in a religious house hold, and it really brought alot of things into question. Mostly lead to a many year long existential crisis. I also felt isolated from my peers, as I was reading these books and supporting secondary academic texts. My day to day thought process was "different". I did fall into something I would consider to be like mental masochism, where I actively tried to stretch (or tear down) my psychology and understanding using these texts.

I am now actually 36, and I don't know that deep philosophy, while some of it true, actually had a positive impact on my life.

I read this book too young, and it ultimately dismantled a lot of beliefs I had, which ended up being a net negative effect on my life. Sometimes you shouldnt look behind the curtain

please i cant take anymore anti ai hot takes.

one or two more model releases, and raw documents passed to claude will beat whatever prompt voodoo you guys are cooking

they need to convince customers its what they need

AI models will do all this natively

The is a psyop, there arent that many science jobs, and a PHD from mississipi state is not "talent"

A year or two from now it will be trivial to copy your product

"It was always possible to clone software, but doing so was costly and time consuming, and the clone would need to be much cheaper, making any such venture financially non-viable.

With AI, that equation is now changing. I anticipate that within 5 years autonomous coding agents will be able to rapidly and cheaply clone almost any existing software, while also providing hosting, operations, and support, all for a small fraction of the cost.

This will inevitably destroy many existing businesses. In order to survive, businesses will require strong network effects (e.g. marketplaces) or extremely deep data/compute moats. There will also be many new opportunities created by the very low cost of software. What could you build if it were possible to create software 1000x faster and cheaper?"

Paul Bucheit

https://x.com/paultoo/status/1999245292294803914

Its not that people will build their own saas, its that competitors will pop up at a rapid pace

"Microservices is the software industry’s most successful confidence scam. It convinces small teams that they are “thinking big” while systematically destroying their ability to move at all. It flatters ambition by weaponizing insecurity: if you’re not running a constellation of services, are you even a real company? Never mind that this architecture was invented to cope with organizational dysfunction at planetary scale. Now it’s being prescribed to teams that still share a Slack channel and a lunch table.

Small teams run on shared context. That is their superpower. Everyone can reason end-to-end. Everyone can change anything. Microservices vaporize that advantage on contact. They replace shared understanding with distributed ignorance. No one owns the whole anymore. Everyone owns a shard. The system becomes something that merely happens to the team, rather than something the team actively understands. This isn’t sophistication. It’s abdication.

Then comes the operational farce. Each service demands its own pipeline, secrets, alerts, metrics, dashboards, permissions, backups, and rituals of appeasement. You don’t “deploy” anymore—you synchronize a fleet. One bug now requires a multi-service autopsy. A feature release becomes a coordination exercise across artificial borders you invented for no reason. You didn’t simplify your system. You shattered it and called the debris “architecture.”

Microservices also lock incompetence in amber. You are forced to define APIs before you understand your own business. Guesses become contracts. Bad ideas become permanent dependencies. Every early mistake metastasizes through the network. In a monolith, wrong thinking is corrected with a refactor. In microservices, wrong thinking becomes infrastructure. You don’t just regret it—you host it, version it, and monitor it.

The claim that monoliths don’t scale is one of the dumbest lies in modern engineering folklore. What doesn’t scale is chaos. What doesn’t scale is process cosplay. What doesn’t scale is pretending you’re Netflix while shipping a glorified CRUD app. Monoliths scale just fine when teams have discipline, tests, and restraint. But restraint isn’t fashionable, and boring doesn’t make conference talks.

Microservices for small teams is not a technical mistake—it is a philosophical failure. It announces, loudly, that the team does not trust itself to understand its own system. It replaces accountability with protocol and momentum with middleware. You don’t get “future proofing.” You get permanent drag. And by the time you finally earn the scale that might justify this circus, your speed, your clarity, and your product instincts will already be gone."

-DHH

College prestige locks people into life dependent paths, and needs to go away

Employers just hire experienced h1bs instead, they won’t leave after being trained, no reason to hire an American

Eh, its either that, or the wrong people are getting promoted. Technical skills != business process modelling

I think you are underestimating how many product problems at big companies are actually bad technical debt. They cant release new features or evolve the offering because the systems are too complicated to change. 1 year of quick development could stunt the whole org for the next five years.

ive never actually seen someone get fired for making some deep architectural software mistake. its alway for moving too slow, or "low code quality". i think people that were promoted for building systems that turned out bad, should be demoted

what I see alot is that the syntax and overall code architecture is text book, but its the completely wrong approach that creates extremely complicated tech debt. All the code reviews will be on the syntax, and none on the big picture of the business problem, or whether the implementation is overcomplicated.

in the short run (1-2 years) there is no repercussion for this, but eventually making changes will be extremely risky and complicated. The individuals that built the software will lord over everyone else with their arcane knowledge of this big pile of junk