| ▲ | sockgrant 3 hours ago |
| “As a designer…” IMHO the bleeding edge of what’s working well with LLMs is within software engineering because we’re building for ourselves, first. Claude code is incredible. Where I work, there are an incredible number of custom agents that integrate with our internal tooling. Many make me very productive and are worthwhile. I find it hard to buy in to opinions of non-SWE on the uselessness of AI solely because I think the innovation is lagging in other areas. I don’t doubt they don’t yet have compelling AI tooling. |
|
| ▲ | ihaveajob 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| I'm curious if you could share something about custom agents. I love Claude Code and I'm trying to get it into more places in my workflow, so ideas like that would probably be useful. |
| |
| ▲ | verdverm 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | I've been using Google ADK to create custom agents (fantastic SDK). With subagents and A2A generally, you should be able to hook any of them into your preferred agentic interface |
|
|
| ▲ | hagbarth 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| If you read a little further in the article, the main point is _not_ that AI is useless. But rather than AGI god building, a regular technology. A valuable one, but not infinite growth. |
| |
| ▲ | NitpickLawyer 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | > But rather than AGI god building, a regular technology. A valuable one, but not infinite growth. AGI is a lot of things, a lot of ever moving targets, but it's never (under any sane definition) "infinite growth". That's already ASI territory / singularity and all that stuff. I see more and more people mixing the two, and arguing against ASI being a thing, when talking about AGI. "Human level competences" is AGI. Super-human, ever improving, infinite growth - that's ASI. If and when we reach AGI is left for everyone to decide. I sometimes like to think about it this way: how many decades would you have to go back, and ask people from that time if what we have today is "AGI". | | |
|
|
| ▲ | hollowturtle 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Where are the products? This site and everywhere around the internet, on x, linkedin and so is full of crazy claims and I have yet to see a product that people need and that actually works. What I'm experiencing is a gigantic enshittification everywhere, Windows sucks, web apps are bloated, slow and uninteresting. Infrastructure goes down even with "memory safe rust" burning millions and millions of compute for scaffolding stupid stuff. Such a disappointment |
| |
| ▲ | redorb 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | I think chatGPT itself is an epic product, Cursor has insane growth and usage. I also think they are both over-hyped, have too much a valuation. | | |
| ▲ | layer8 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Citing AI software as the only examples of how AI benefits developing software, has a bit of a touch of self-help books describing how to attain success and fulfillment by taking the example of writing self-help books. I don’t disagree that these are useful tools, by the way. I just haven’t seen any discernible uptick in general software quality and utility either, nor any economic uptick that should presumably follow from being able to develop software more efficiently. | |
| ▲ | emp17344 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It doesn’t matter what you think. Where’s all the data proving that AI is actually valuable? All we have are anecdotes and promises. | |
| ▲ | hollowturtle 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | ChatGPT is... a chat with some "augmentation" feature aka outputting rich html responses, nothing new except the generative side. Cursor is a VSCode fork with a custom model and a very good autocomplete integration. Again where are the products? Where the heck is Windows without the bloat that works reliably before becoming totally agentic? And therefore idiotic since it doesn't work reliably | |
| ▲ | oblio an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | I agree with everyone else, where is the Microsoft Office competitor created by 2 geeks in a garage with Claude Code? Where is the Exchange replacement created by a company of 20 people? There are many really lucrative markets that need a fresh approach, and AI doesn't seem to have caused a huge explosion of new software created by upstarts. Or am I missing something? Where are the consumer facing software apps developed primarily with AI by smaller companies? I'm excluding big companies because in their case it's impossible to prove the productivity, the could be throwing more bodies at the problem and we'd never know. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | muldvarp 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > IMHO the bleeding edge of what’s working well with LLMs is within software engineering because we’re building for ourselves, first. How are we building _for_ ourselves when we literally automate away our jobs? This is probably one of the _worst_ things someone could do to me. |
| |
| ▲ | DennisP 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Software engineers been automating our own work since we built the first assembler. So far it's just made us more productive and valuable, because the demand for software has been effectively unlimited. Maybe that will continue with AI, or maybe our long-standing habit will finally turn against us. | | |
| ▲ | muldvarp 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | > Software engineers been automating our own work since we built the first assembler. The declared goal of AI is to automated software engineering entirely. This is in no way comparable to building an assembler. So the question is mostly about whether or not this goal will be achieved. Still, nobody is building these systems _for_ me. They're building them to replace me, because my living is too much for them to pay. |
|
|
