|
| ▲ | skydhash 4 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| If you have ever endured the pain of bad code and cumbersome architecture when trying to fix a bug or implementing a feature, you start to be adverse to anything that increase the likelihood of it happening. Most people that happily use the LLM for coding either are not responsible for the code running or have no qualms to being a reverse centaur. |
|
| ▲ | pydry 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Weird. Ive seen the exact opposite. The LLM drones talking endlessly how to write fairly basic code using LLMs in a way that is not actually solving problems any quicker or more effectively but is doing it in a way that they see as "more modern". Ironically I don't think software engineering has progressed much at all since vibe coding got fashionable. Real, meaningful engineering advances are being drowned out by the AI coding religion. |
| |
| ▲ | ehnto 2 days ago | parent [-] | | The front page of HN has definitely be sparse on actual software accomplishments, it's been a lot of meta-level chatter on AI. Obviously a very important technology, but also just a tool, a means to an end. I am not seeing much progress in other fields making it to HN regardless of what tool they used. I hope it's happening, and just being drowned out. |
|
|
| ▲ | hgoel 4 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Agreed, I see a lot of the type of people you're describing on here. |
| |
| ▲ | discreteevent 4 days ago | parent [-] | | That type are called "engineers". I used to interview them and I didn't care if they knew anything about the business. Large codebases are the most complex things we have ever worked on and can easily become unmaintainable. I wanted people who really cared about code quality and consistency in order to offset this. I think that it would be even more important to hire people like that now and even though we will need less programmers there were never enough of that type to go around anyway. | | |
|
