tarsinge

But that's not how "mysterious" is used here. These scientists did not meet their end during an obvious outdoor activity.

To me it was already quite intuitive, we are not really managing the psychological state: at its core a LLM try to make the concatenation of your input + its generated output the more similar it can with what it has been trained on. I think it’s quite rare in the LLMs training set to have examples of well thought professional solution in a hackish and urgency context.

I understand why they might be anxious, but my point is it’s unrelated to the technology itself. Imagine people denying the internet works in 2000 because of the Dotcom bubble. Same with layoffs, they are not really due to AI (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_United_States_corporate_m...), it’s a political discussion. And the antiwork vibe is not new, I have strong political convictions on how we should more equally redistribute capital gains so that even if AI was able to replace software engineers it would not be an issue but again that is political.

LLMs tooling brings a lot to senior devs. I have 15 YOE, I own a small agency, we are shipping faster, with less bugs, and believe it or not we are hiring, because we are able to take more work and grow, as it is logical without the political issues plaguing the US in particular. The market is already adjusting, hence why to me we are way past the point of developing professionally without LLMs.

So no I don’t get why the political topics are not discussed elsewhere and the irrational denial of the technology because of said political issues.

How can you still can't distinguish between using LLMs as tools and a non technical person vibe coding? I have yet to run into any serious software engineer that had to dive into a legacy codebase or an unknown tech stack and found no value in e.g. Claude Code for general understanding and refactoring. Not even talking about coding, just the capacity of generating custom contextualised documentation and examples tailored to your constraints and skills on the fly is ridiculously helpful.

> We are SO past the point of software being developed without LLMs at _all_

That's exactly why I've given up on programming, development or career subreddits. There are a lot of interesting software engineering challenges opening up, but instead of discussing it like professionals it all gets drowned in a big negative mixture of rants against the financial AI bubble, companies using AI as an excuse to lay off, and a general antiwork vibe. All these subreddits have become feel good/bad echo chambers for angry teens and students with no real world professional experience.

I’m not sure because in many modern open world games you are just like a Uber driver following GPS from checkpoint to checkpoint. It would with old school games that relied on memorizing the world and had minimal or even no map indications.

The reasoning is by being polite the LLM is more likely to stay on a professional path: at its core a LLM try to make your prompt coherent with its training set, and a polite prompt + its answer will score higher (gives better result) than a prompt that is out of place with the answer. I understand to some people it could feel like anthropomorphising and could turn them off but to me it's purely about engineering.

Edit: wording

Uber and Airbnb have network effects. You cant increase price when there is no cost in switching.

When the incumbent shoot themselves in the foot. Google and Microsoft are consultancy driven bureaucracies with abysmal product culture. At best Google will be the one providing the back end, but it’s very unlikely to me they’ll win the end user product space.

The problem is not that individual action is not useful, it’s that governments and companies are actively discouraging it, because every success for climate change is a bad news item. People buying less cars? Climate change win, economic problem. People buying less stuff, consumption down? Huge climate change win, very bad economic news. Even on progressive news outlets they’re doing it.

Here in Europe even before Trump’s second mandate it was clear governments didn’t really want individual action to take off. And it’s even worse now. Because short and mid term it’s a choice between climate and GDP. And western governments and companies are fundamentally incapable of long term action that is painful short term.

I get your general point but specifically regarding :

> have it diarized, send out minutes, grab relevant info and surface it before the next relevant meeting

Slack already has this integrated and it works quite well.

> It's even more depressing to see folks on HACKER news boost the "programming never mattered" mentality that's taken hold these last few years.

No, it's more like some folks like me are passionate about building/creating things that are useful or enjoyable, not about the tooling itself. I learned to use computers because I wanted to make things with them, like music. I got into programming because I wanted to create video games and apps. I enjoy programming because I'm passionate about the end result, but not about programming itself. Look at other engineering disciplines, do civil engineers complain that they are not paving the roads themselves?

I don't find it's a new mentality on Hacker News, to me it was always about broadening the hacker mentality outside of programming. Maybe it's more like the Venn diagram of people passionate about computers and programming for the sake of it and software engineers and builders used to completely overlap, but it is starting to drift, so the fact that we belong to different crowd is becoming more apparent.

Except this time it's the main banks doing it?

> another car sees a gap and changes lanes in front of you

Usually if you maintain the slightly slower speed you had to maintain a safe following distance it doesn't matter, as the distance will either increase or they'll leave for another lane. You have to get used to drivers doing messy things in front of you, but at a safe distance. When doing this you are in fact helping the traffic becoming more fluid.

> The trick is to realize that most market discussion you're not paying for is itself marketing at best and cosplay at worst.

There was a leak posted on Wallstreetbets of some paid analysis (https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/1qpwyqz/dbs...), and it was basically follow the hype with a layer of sophisticated post rationalisation on top. I fail to see the difference between these and the average "DD" on an investing subreddit.

Excerpt from the Tesla one (https://www.dbs.com/content/article/pdf/US_clover/Tesla.pdf):

> Leading EV manufacturer. Tesla is a leading global EV manufacturer, backed by its firm market leadership and healthy automotive margins. Tesla's leading share is backed by its economic MOAT in EV charging infrastructure and supercharger network, autonomous driving and other software (e.g., full self- driving aka FSD) (...) Tesla’s pivot toward AI provides a long- term growth foundation, but near-term performance will remain sensitive to progress on AI-driven execution milestones.

To me it is simply good writing, the kind that is found in literature, but feels a bit out of place in discussions on the internet. What makes it stand out is that real English speaker on the internet are way more casual in their writing. I’ve also noticed that non native English speaker are sometimes mistaken for LLMs due to these less casual sentences structure.

I did a road trip across the US 7 years ago and I barely touched the pedals and the wheel on highway drive, it was a 2018 Subaru Outback.

This kind of warrior ethos outside of fantasy books or games is a huge turn off to me, it feels so anachronistic. I don’t understand why it seems so prevalent in the US, especially as a country built on Christianity that has Jesus coming as an harmless lamb to teach compassion, humility and love. Courage, devotion, perseverance, sure. Victory or defeat? No thanks.

To me there is an even more important point than economics and geopolitics: the Chinese government is thinking about the long term sustainability of its population, and given how large it is it makes quite aligned with the rest of the world. Environment, health, education, science, etc. when comparing the trajectory and future plans of China and the US it is quite telling. Here are a few excerpts, guess if they come from Project 2025 or Xi Jinping 14 commitments:

- Adopting new science-based ideas for "innovative, coordinated, green, open and shared development".

- Improving people's livelihood and well-being is the primary goal of development

- Coexisting well with nature with "energy conservation and environmental protection" policies and "contribute to global ecological safety".

I don’t think the main issue is that this type of person has been put in charge, it’s that the system can fail because of the will of one person. It kind of reveals that the guardrails were decorum and at its core Americans elects dictators that up until now chose to behave well.

More generally I think in an age of social media democracies will have to evolve to prevent leadership cults. Maybe something like the head of state being indirectly elected by local representatives.

Conversely I have very little interest in the process of programming by itself, all the magic is about the end result and the business value for me (which fortunately has served me quite well professionally). As young as I remember I was fascinated with the GUI DBMS (4th Dimension/FileMaker/MS Access/…) my dad used to improve his small business. I only got into programming only to not be limited by graphical tools. So LLMs for me are just a nice addition in my toolbox, like a power tool is to a manual one. It doesn’t philosophically changes anything.

The analogy with evolution breaks down because currently the fitness function is broken. It would work in a world where anti trust would be still enforced, where customers could vote with their money instead of having to deal with enshitiffied monopolies. In a world where tech CEOs can buy a dinner to stay above the law, where tech is used as a weapon of influence so that other countries like in the EU are not allowed under penalty of sanctions to not use US platforms even when it breaks their law, it is reassuring for engineer minds but ultimately pointless to explain the state of the industry from market dynamics alone.

A CEO can be valuable while still doing nothing with a simple explanation: they are cult figures whose purpose is to increase the stock value. This is obvious in the case of a drug addict like Elon like you describe, but others are increasingly copying the playbook.

I don’t understand the urgency to replace human work with AI. Why is every organization so eager about skipping the AI as an assistant step? Here there are already massive productivity gains in using the AI to create the draft of the report, it makes little economical to make it do the final version compared to the risk, maybe it’s just plain laziness? Same with developers, why is very organization wanting to leapfrog from humans write all the code to they don’t even read the generated code?

This is off topic, I’m talking about the environmental footprint of data centers. In the 2010s I remember when responding to RFPs I had to specify the carbon footprint of our servers. ESG was all the rage and every big tech company was trying to appear green. Fast forward to today where companies, investors, and obviously the administration are more than fine with data centers burning all the oil/gas/coal power that can be found.

> that effort is completely abandoned directly because of AI

That effort is completely abandoned because of the current US administration and POTUS a situation that big tech largely contributed to. It’s not AI that is responsible for the 180 zeitgeist change on environmental issues.

It’s still wild because it’s mostly useless. Rewriting a few core components might improve security a bit, but otherwise it’ll not change anything for end users. This is the typical attractive but useless project for bored programmer with no product or business vision.

Professionally programming is just a means to an end that is solving a business problem. Just like hammering nails or turning screws is not a job in itself. The craft is important, but ultimately what people pay for is a final product (a house, a bridge, a software that does X, etc.), and our job is to build something that match their constraints. What you describe is the equivalent of complex novel construction projects, not what the vast majority of the construction industry is about.

Building a house is like a CRUD app, it already was a solved problem technically. AI is like prefabs or power tools. If your job and what you were interested in was building houses AI is great. If you were a brick layer not so much.

Engineer is not an aggrandizing title, it’s the job. Being paid for the hobby of writing code was just an anomaly that AI will close in the majority of the industry IMO.

> The private sector can fund projects which are opportunities with an economic basis

The private sector can only fund easy low hanging fruit productization projects (Tesla, Apple, SpaceX, …) once the hard public fundamental research and infrastructure (Internet, Rocket Science, Physics, etc…) that has no short term economic value investment is done.

I don’t have much time to evaluate tools every months and I have settled on Cursor. I’m curious on what I’m missing when using the same models?