| ▲ | sph 3 hours ago |
| They get abandoned because they get generated on a whim. Sunk cost fallacy can be a feature: if you have spent a lot of blood, sweat, and tears on a project, you are more likely to push it through adversity and the doldrums that inevitably one will encounter. If all it took was one of those momentarily brilliant ideas and a prompt on Claude to produce something, there is no attachment whatsoever to it. Speaking as the ‘average programmer’, I have dozens of brilliant ideas per day that don’t stand the test of time or scrutiny, and the very few that pass the filter don’t seem that interesting days later, or worth the effort at all. Ideas have always been cheap. Now, proof of concepts have become as cheap. I don’t care about your Show HN unless you have spent a month on it. |
|
| ▲ | TeriyakiBomb an hour ago | parent | next [-] |
| A drum I've been banging increasingly often recently is that having friction and time to work ideas over in your mind adds huge amounts of value. Vibe coded projects have this very specific, well, vibe to them where you can clearly see that the lack of time to digest has allowed the person to not challenge their own worst impulses. You can see it in the feature bloat, the lack of depth and polish in core features and the wild asides you tend to talk yourself out of still on display. |
| |
| ▲ | sph a minute ago | parent | next [-] | | Yes, there is a widespread belief in tech that 'removing friction' is a good direction to aim for. But you can have too little friction that completely ruins a product and the user experience. In game design friction very important; remove all friction and you don't even have a game any more. My favourite metaphor for it is sex: there is no sex without friction. What LLM have done is massively reduce the friction of intellectual effort, completely devaluing most expressions of it. | |
| ▲ | ramses0 37 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Fuben-Eki! https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37169679 | | |
| ▲ | nivethan 16 minutes ago | parent [-] | | thanks for that link, I've thought that friction was helpful but this gives me a word and a concept to look at. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | budsniffer952 27 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| >Ideas have always been cheap. Now, proof of concepts have become as cheap. I don’t care about your Show HN unless you have spent a month on it. Yes. I'm as pro-AI coding as people come, but this is the part that bugs me too. If you whip something useful up in a weekend, great! But you don't have to present it like you are building an actual product. It's fine if no one else knows about it. Because the fact is, most people don't care, even before AI. Building for yourself is fine. |
|
| ▲ | manphone 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It’s the same reason why everyone doesn’t wanna read LLM generated blog posts. The agreement used to be generally that you would spend more time writing than I would have to spend reading and when the agreement changes the quality changes as well. |
| |
| ▲ | gavinsyancey an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | Yeah -- if it wasn't worth your time to write the post, why do I think it should be worth my time to read it? | |
| ▲ | mbesto 9 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | You can't unilaterally say all AI blogs are low quality. That's bullshit. > would spend more time writing than I would have to spend reading To your point however, the reason people don't like AI generated blogs is because there is a explicit recognition that the author of the blog lacked effort. There is a visceral response for the reader about the social contract "if you didn't spend as much time as I did why should I care about what's written here", it's however NOT that the quality is inherently poor (but perhaps one my insinuate that notion). | | |
| ▲ | asdf88990 2 minutes ago | parent [-] | | > You can't unilaterally say all AI blogs are low quality. That's bullshit. Quality is a bit nuanced but that quality of AI generated content is subpar to expert output is fairly established. The implications of this ever becoming false amounts to GAI. |
| |
| ▲ | 27183 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Writing is thinking. If you don't spend time writing, then you didn't spend time thinking. LLMs don't think. Consequently, if you outsourced your writing to an LLM the resulting artifact was born of a thoughtless process. Instead of engaging your readers in your thought process you're tricking them with a puzzle. Readers will try to understand what you're thinking about (at least the non-passive ones will). This activity is a dead end for LLM output. | | |
| ▲ | Leonard_of_Q 8 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Is writing thinking? Good writing requires thinking but does that also go for sloppy writing? What is thinking? This is the subject of a discussion [1, 2] I'm in - which in true HN style has been greyed-out because of ${reasons} - regarding the question whether these models 'think'. Your comment on writing [being] thinking supports the idea that what these models do is a form of thinking: selecting the next most likely descriptors given the current problem space including all previously added descriptors. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48884193 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48890755 |
| |
| ▲ | pydry 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Or rather because they are always just of poor quality | | |
| ▲ | ungovernableCat an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | If you had a time machine and you could republish a claude generated article about some interesting tech topic to 2010 I'm sure it would get ok engagement. To me the issue is that everything becomes written in the same style pattern. I don't know why but if I spot it I wince internally and immediately skim the post or just outright stop reading. A large part of it is overexposure. For me it's made browsing the internet quite uncomfortable since it's unavoidable. I mainly spend my online time in group chats these days. | | | |
| ▲ | pmarreck 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Define “quality” (I’m pretty sure both you and I would “know it when we see it”, but…) |
| |
| ▲ | locknitpicker an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > It’s the same reason why everyone doesn’t wanna read LLM generated blog posts. The agreement used to be generally that you would spend more time writing than I would have to spend reading and when the agreement changes the quality changes as well. That's not it at all. The problem with AI slop is that in general it's not worth reading, because to start off even the author deemed the topic wasn't even worth writing to begin with. Worst, most AI slop blog spam was obviously not even reviewed by the bloggers who prompted them into existence. This means is also content that even the bloggers themselves felt wasn't worth reading at all. But somehow they expect us to invest our time reading AI slop? | | |
| ▲ | bombcar 30 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Think how much LinkedIn slop wasn’t worth reading BEFORE AI; but at least some effort had to be put in. Now none is needed. |
| |
| ▲ | Der_Einzige 35 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Cope for being a carbon chauvinist. The medium is not the message (and the folks who try to convince you that it is are loony/charlatans/frauds like Marshall McLuhan). The message is the message. |
|
|
| ▲ | BetterThanSober an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I wonder how much they spend on this rewrite, in tokens and $ using commercial pricing |
| |
| ▲ | taude 6 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | it said in the original article on the bun rewrite ~165K. | |
| ▲ | Jnr an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | I saw an estimate of around 160k $ somewhere in HN comments about the rewrite. |
|
|
| ▲ | throwatdem12311 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Maybe those ideas aren’t so brilliant. |
|
| ▲ | locknitpicker an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > They get abandoned because they get generated on a whim. I think it's more than that. These greenfield projects are actually things that, up until the inception of LLMs, they were not worth creating. With AI code assistants, the cost of developing them is lower, but in the end you still end up with a project that no one bothered to create. |
|
| ▲ | m4xp an hour ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Keep in mind logic bug that ai makes are extremely hard and expensive to fix as the clanker needs to parse thousand and thousands of lines of text every prompt while a human tries to explain what it's obviously doing wrong. I hate ai so much because its so easy to generate quick slop that "appears" functional. |