| ▲ | drpotato 2 hours ago | |||||||
I am in a similar boat. Design and product use Claude to vibe design/code a feature/experience and rapidly prototype it, getting it in front of customers to get feedback with minimal engineering time. Amazing! However, you might be surprised to find out it hasn’t really helped us ship stuff faster overall. The reason, I believe, is we’ve lost something along the way. Thinking. A non-trivial amount of which is now outsourced to a language model. It paints over the cracks in the prompt, hallucinates how things should work when unspecified, what would normally make someone stop and say “this isn’t quite working”, “how should I communicate this idea” or “what happens when…” has gone. Now, these details are left for after it’s been built proper. Sure, we can improve the process and reflect more on how to utilise this new technique … but is it better than how things used to be? Yeah nah | ||||||||
| ▲ | MikeNotThePope 15 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
My experience has been there’s more “what did it make and does it work?” overhead. It’s like a junior developer throwing stuff over the wall and I’m responsible for seeing if it sticks. | ||||||||
| ▲ | hparadiz 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
I did this before AI though. I'd sometimes just build mockups directly in React using real components because it was quick and easy to put a form together with existing UI elements. I remember one project where the whole team was waiting on designs and I just came into stand up and was like "I built this yesterday. Is this what we wanted?" | ||||||||
| ||||||||