Nothing about what you are describing sounds sane or legal in most jurisdictions. You still need a structural engineer. None of the sources you are describing are reliable.

▲

harmmonica a day ago | parent [-]

The sources are reliable. There are prescribed sources for lumber products, fasteners, etc. in residential construction, at least in the US, that are just as accessible to you and me online as they are to structural engineers. Those same sources are what the engineers themselves rely on to do their work, or, more likely, most engineers rely on software that has those sources built in and don't ever reference the primary sources. All the information you need to make concrete, empirical decisions about things like posts in residential construction are available online and don't require an engineering degree to figure out. LLM's are great at taking the uncertain language you input and finding all the sources, and the calculations, for you so you don't have to spend hours digging around on Google to find a "document" you didn't know how to search for, that then has 600 numbers on it that you have to spend more time discerning which number is the right one to use. Or which calculation out of the infinite number out there is the right one for your case. Kind of like a skeleton key or maybe a dictionary that equips you with the language you don't yet know to get to the bottom of something you don't yet fully understand.

Btw, I would not trust an LLM to tell me how to build a suspension bridge. First, I'm unfamiliar with that space. Second, even if I was familiar, the stakes are, as you say, so high that it would be insane to trust something so complex without expert sign off. The post I'm specifically talking about? Near-zero stakes and near-zero risk.

<stepping on the soapbox> I beg folks to always try and pierce the veil of complexity. Some things are complex and require very specialized training and guardrails. But other complexity is fabricated. There are entrenched interests who want you to feel like you can't do certain things. They're not malicious, but they sometimes exist to make or protect money. There are entire industries propped up by trade groups that are there to make it seem like some things are too complex to be done by laypeople, who have lobbied legislators for regulations that keep folks like you from tackling them. And if your knee-jerk reply is that I'm some kind of conspiracy theorist or anarchist all I'm saying is it's a spectrum. Suspension bridge with traffic driving over it --> should double, triple, quadruple check with professional(s); a post in a house supporting the entire house's load (exaggeration for effect) --> get a single professional to sign off; a post in a house that's supporting a single floor joist with minimal live and dead load (my case!) --> use an LLM to help you DIY the "engineering" to get to good enough (good enough = high margin for error); replace a light switch --> DIY YouTube video.

I am the king of long-winded HN posts. Obviously the time I took to write this (look, ma, no LLM!) is asymmetric with what you wrote, but I'm genuinely wondering if any of this makes you think differently. If not, that's cool of course (and great for the engineers and permit issuers!).

▲

lazide a day ago | parent [-]

The issue here is you still don’t know what you don’t know. But you think you do.

The reason you hire a structural engineer is because they do - and they are on the hook if it goes wrong. Which is also why they have to stamp drawings, etc.

Because the next person who owns the house should have some idea who was screwing with the structure of it.

You might be 100% on top of it - in which case that structural engineer should have no problem stamping your calcs eh?

▲

harmmonica a day ago | parent [-]

Ah, nice, thanks so much for actually sticking around to reply. I mean, I get what you're saying, and I know I won't be able to convince you otherwise, but I'll repeat that structural engineering can be complex, but it's not always and a lot of it is prescriptive.

The only other thing I'll add is the ideal vs. the reality. What percent of structural projects done to single-family construction, in particular, do you think is done by engineers? I would guess it's far less than 50%. That's based on my own experience working in the industry, which I know you won't trust (why would you? Random internet guy after all). But for conversation's sake suffice it to say that I believe every time you walk into a house that's several decades old or older you're likely walking into a place that has been manipulated structurally without an engineer's stamp. And the vast majority (99%+ of the time) it's perfectly safe to be in that space.

▲

lazide a day ago | parent [-]

Of course - but if you’ve gone behind 99% of people doing their own electrical, you’ll also understand why I’m saying what I’m saying.

Everyone thinks they are the exception. Occasionally, one of them is even right, eh?

▲

harmmonica a day ago | parent [-]

Think I've done that and I'll raise you an "and yet barely any houses burn down due to their electrical!" I actually jest. But electrical is one of those things that anyone can do, but ought to be done with the utmost care (and in the US many jurisdictions allow DIY electrical if you're doing the work for your own place).

And just to clarify I don't think I'm the exception. I was actually making the opposite argument. Almost anyone can and should attempt to deconstruct complexity because doing things is not always as difficult as it would seem (or as difficult as we've been told).

Appreciate the dialogue, lazide!

	▲	lazide a day ago \| parent [-]
		Eh, I’ve dealt with enough people to say nah - people really should not be doing their own structural engineering, or electrical. It isn’t due to ‘complexity’ either - rather indifference, laziness, or just plain stupidity. I’ve seen people almost burn down their places multiple times - and at least one family actually die from an electrical fire. Also, partial building collapses. The reason you don’t see it more often is because people generally don’t actually try.