Remix.run Logo
alkyon 2 hours ago

Sounds like exponential growth of crappy software. I'm not saying that before we didn't have mass produced crap in SE, but now it will turn into explosive overflow.

cdata 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

We are living in a ZIRP-like era where builders at the fastest pace layer have misattributed their velocity to exponential gains in model capability. In fact, they are surfing on decades of careful effort to build a robust foundation of highly reusable software libraries.

This strategy will seem to work really well until the economy that enabled that foundation to form is hollowed out. Then, there will be a reckoning (but we will have no choice but to march forth from there).

chairmansteve 22 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

"but we will have no choice but to march forth from there".

If you haven't seen it, I think you would appreciate the film Margin Call.

patates 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's not just software libraries. Specs, applications (the browser!), expectations, device integrations, operating systems, etc. So much that starting from scratch seems impossible.

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you, but my brain cannot comprehend how machines can advance such interconnected systems while keeping humans in focus.

Perhaps I shouldn't have watched the Animatrix again.

solenoid0937 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> This strategy will seem to work really well until the economy that enabled that foundation to form is hollowed out. Then, there will be a reckoning (but we will have no choice but to march forth from there).

There will only be a reckoning if models don't get much better.

If they do get much better you can just have them refactor, fix bugs in, or replace the existing codebase.

The concept of tech debt is sort of meaningless if you anticipate intelligence gains in models to continue.

gbro3n 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

This is a great point. LLMs can't speed up human decision processes and alignment.

eunos 34 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You could say the same when higher level languages getting popular. Previously programming was the domain of Math, Physics, EE doctorates. These days we even have a few months coding bootcamp

vitalyan1234 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

"exponential growth of crappy X" applies to every industry that went from being an artisanal craft to being mass produced with little or no human input. and we live much better lives than we did before the industrial revolution.

chairmansteve 16 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

I think some industries have notably high quality output. Automobiles, aerospace for example.

andriy_koval 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

most industries have high cost of entrance unlike software, so decision makers are way more careful on how to move forward.

In software + GenAI now every housewife can build some App over evening.

kajman 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I still can't tell from the outside whether it sounds like a great time to be in security because of the vulnerable slop being churned out, or a terrible time because the people paying to make it don't care.

solenoid0937 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Crap is fine if it gets the job done. I think software as an industry will change to more ephemeral construction.

HanClinto 16 minutes ago | parent [-]

Paper plates of software development.

epolanski 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I am more and more inclined into not believing this crappy software theory.

Especially as teams invest in proper agentic harnessing.

We have had a champion in our team that has invested a lot of time into it over the last 4 months, and if anything, quality has improved, not decreased. Architecture is more coherent, codebase has been cleaned up, agents find information quickly, code produced is very solid and my role is more and more checking that the output meets the requirements. But I cannot confidently say that I would've done a better job than AI more often than not I have to admit it does a better job than mine.

The mistakes are less and less technical and merely in the domain mapping. And AI is still not creative as I am for finding solutions quickly to unlock stakeholders' issues. Also, AI is still not creative as I am for finding the proper solutions for advanced technical problems. But it does a better job than me, even on that front, one shotting few solutions in a fraction of a time it would've taken me to test one idea myself.

Mind you, I don't like AI and I think it ruined the job, I don't like working this way, it's exhausting, way more work on one side, way less fun and fiddling with technical parts.

And yet, I have the genuine belief that few years from now we'll be cloning open source repositories that are already optimized/harnessed and tested for agentic loops and best practices left and right with software engineers mostly overseeing the domain translation and putting their 2 cents on the non-boilerplatey parts of the product (which, in general, are a small part of the surface).

I think that the next years of my career will be mostly spent in setting up and writing the harnessing and domain mapping part. Then I will move to another sector, not because I necessarily believe I won't have a job, but because I want to vomit thinking that's going to be my job.

altcognito an hour ago | parent | next [-]

It makes no sense. I mean, T2 covered this:

"Watching John with the machine, it was suddenly so clear. The terminator would never stop. It would never leave him, and it would never hurt him, never shout at him, or get drunk and hit him, or say it was too busy to spend time with him. It would always be there. And it would die to protect him. Of all the would-be fathers who came and went over the years, this thing, this machine, was the only one who measured up. In an insane world, it was the sanest choice."

As long as you've indicated what you want, the machine will try to do what you ask of it. It won't get tired because "the codebase is too big", or it has gotten bored of the pattern, or it wants to introduce a new technology.

It just does the thing you asked of it. (note, that yes, I get that as a codebase size increases, it might make it more difficult to fit into context, but that only applies if it needs to read a large percentage of the project to implement the task, which shouldn't be the case.

epolanski 43 minutes ago | parent [-]

I'm confused, what does not make sense?

andriy_koval an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> We have had a champion in our team

there are good actors, which are empowered by AI to produce positive impact, but often there are N times more bad actors, which push crappy code to close feature requests fast, increase performance LoC-like metrics, etc.