Remix.run Logo
hombre_fatal 8 hours ago

I mostly agree with you.

Though something I half-miss is using my own software as I build it to get a visceral feel for the abstractions so far. I've found that testability is a good enough proxy for "nice to use" since I think "nice to use" tends to mean that a subsystem is decoupled enough to cover unexpected usage patterns, and that's an incidental side-effect of testability.

One concern I have is that it's getting harder to demonstrate ability.

e.g. Github profiles were a good signal though one that nobody cared about unless the hiring person was an engineer who could evaluate it. But now that signal is even more rubbish. Even readmes and blog posts are becoming worse signals since they don't necessarily showcase your own communication skills anymore nor how you think about problems.

Aperocky 8 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Funny enough, I think github and communication are still a huge part of what I see.

Github code itself maybe irrelevant, but is the product KISS/UNIX? Or is it an demonstration of complete lack of discipline about what "feature" should be added. If you see something that have multiple weakly or completely irrelevant feature strung together, it's saying something. Additionally, AI would often create speghetti structures, and require human shepherding to ensure the structure remain sound.

Same with communication. I have AI smell, I know if something is AI slop. In my current job, docs sent with expectation for others to read always prefaced with -- this section typed 100% by aperocky -- and I dispensed with grammar and spelling checks for added authenticity. I'll then add -- following section is AI generated -- to mark the end of my personal writing.

I think that is the way to go in the future. I pass intentional thinking into AI, not the other way around. There are knowledge flowing back for sure, but only humans possess intention, at least for now.

kaashif 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Those things are all still signals. If taken from a snapshot of the Internet pre-AI.

treyd 7 hours ago | parent [-]

People were still gaming GitHub profiles before AI, sometimes even just reuploading existing repos as their own.

the_af 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> But now that signal is even more rubbish. Even readmes and blog posts are becoming worse signals since they don't necessarily showcase your own communication skills anymore nor how you think about problems.

Yup. I've spotted former coworkers who I know for a fact can barely write in their native language, let alone in English, working for AWS and writing English-language technical blog posts in full AI-ese. Full of the usual "it's not X, it's Y", full of AI-slop. Most of the text is filler, with a few tidbits of real content here and there.

I don't know before, but now blog posts have become more noise than signal.

Aperocky 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It's a strong signal in the negative direction, the best kind of signal really.

icedchai 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The "dead Internet" theory has become more real. It's especially bad on LinkedIn. Everyone is now an "AI expert", posting generated slop and updating their profiles with AI enhanced head shots.

the_af 3 hours ago | parent [-]

> It's especially bad on LinkedIn

Agreed, but to be fair, LinkedIn was especially bad to begin with.

Even before AI-slop, LinkedIn posts were rightfully mocked. Self-congratulatory or self-pitying, full of empty platitudes and "lessons learned" and "journeys" (ended or started). There was never anything worth reading to begin with.

Now it's of course worse. I don't think I can stand reading about another self-appointed expert on LinkedIn writing about their completely unwarranted strategy and/or lessons and/or skepticism about AI.

I only go to LinkedIn for the daily puzzles!

icedchai 24 minutes ago | parent [-]

Yes, we have more "thought leaders" than ever, all acting like copy-and-pasting from a textbox is some sort of unique skill.