they keep doing this, and everything gets worse for it; i remember when they rewrite mDNSResponder and internet connectivity went to hell... and the ux in system preferences is atrocious... just text labels and lists everywhere, no attention to detail.
the people who built/designed/managed the rollout osx and nextstep were a totally different breed imo
> Seriously want to know what people really think...
(in a vacuum) i think we would all be saying thats amazing and fundamentally change the way we see ourselves and place in the universe (science fiction becomes science fact) and open new possibilities for research and discoveries
> find "life". So? Why is this important to people?
when there are more down-to-earth problems right in front of us, i get this as well; why not use that money to fund free college for a couple years for all citizens etc etc
that is to say, you have to be a good dev first and foremost, and no matter how much harnessing you do there is gonna be a limit to the quality of output by the user (otherwise why not just use a no-code tool instead)
(the ironic thing is tho, people starting out with just llms will probably never progress to 'good dev' in the first place...)
This is the one thing I'm curious about, what's the next generation of devs going to look like? Just a bunch of people who treat the codebase as a black box, pump out slop, and call it a day when the feature works?
I imagine there will be value in being able to understand every line of code for a while, because many (most?) things don't seem amenable to long term vibe coding. But how will that knowledge be obtained? Maybe there will be a much smaller pool of devs with the patience to actual learn bespoke software development.
Or, AI will actually get good enough that vibe coding is better in every case than mindful development. I guess the main factor is how long it takes for that to happen.
> Just a bunch of people who treat the codebase as a black box, pump out slop, and call it a day when the feature works?
my guess is yes, because that is what i am seeing today in front of me with new grads
> Or, AI will actually get good enough that vibe coding is better in every case than mindful development. I guess the main factor is how long it takes for that to happen.
i think there is a limit to this; you could train an llm to never dereference a null pointer or something like that, and you could probably minimize other security related stuff, but in the end its a token predictor, so you stuck with probabilities... i wouldn't vibe anything that had any security/legal/user related things but thats just me.
Most of us effectively function as next-token predictors, in my experience. Some of us are trained not to dereference null pointers, but there's always a non-zero probability that we do so anyway. To reduce that risk I use the same tools an LLM would, i.e. code review, automated testing and verification, etc. There isn't obviously much difference between humans and LLMs in that sense.
Like you I would not vibe code something important, but I think that's primarily because I want to have a deep understanding of a system before I accept responsibility for it. An LLM would still be useful during implementation and likely to increase the quality of the result.
It seems very likely that AIs will become capable enough that they can take complete responsibility for development, deployment and maintenance of the systems we're used to building. Further, it seems likely they'll end up much more capable than humans have been. I think that's an eventuality we need to be prepared for.
A well-utilised AI tool can probably already build a much safer and more robust security/legal/user related system than you or I can, in any given time budget. There's a question around what happens as humans are required less for the "well utilised" part, and who is responsible when humans are not really involved anymore.
are you a well known business or submitting your very first app? its anecdotal, but it seems to me from experience at a couple companies is that apple/google are quick to review even new apps from established companies...
Ive heard that but not sure if true. I've been building and submitting apps for 15 years and have multiple approved and maintained apps in the store. (I am the developer of Hack, one of top hacker news clients on iOS and Android).
> but still use the services because of free/cheap/etc
it may be a crazy idea, but if they ever made a law that said 'free trial not withstanding, services must be payed for and not free' i wonder if that would fix the issue real fast...
(of course a side effect might be that half the economy implodes but thats besides the point ^^)
What exactly is the issue? Consumers complain about the bad parts of it, yet overwhelmingly use it. Sure, temporary dissatisfaction is there, but they still make it obvious with their choices that they want to use the offered product.
they overwhelmingly use it because its free, but if they even had to pay one cent i'd bet they'd loose half their customers and start shopping around on different metrics of quality
making things free causes a loss of price signal, so i'd say it would be a good idea to restore that...
I’m confused though. Customers, overwhelmingly, want the free service with crappy issues. So an intervention would just be anti-consumer? We’d optimize the quality, but people wouldn’t use it.
maybe? but you are paying for it with you data and usage, you just don't realize it (in addition to being subsequently manipulated by it); that could also probably considered anti-consumer imho...
> but people wouldn’t use it.
yep, thats right. thats why i think having a price signal where the actual cost is upfront; now you don't discover later your data is being used against you as a "cost" but consider upfront 'do i really wanna pay for this or do something else' etc
said in another way, i feel like giving the customer upfront knowledge about what something actually costs is more pro-consumer because now we can make informed choices
> you are paying for it with you data and usage, you just don't realize it
I don't think this (people not realizing it) is true. We've heard this argument since early 2010s, and the general attitude of population is "ok, cool, so what?". Even people like me, who know that I'm paying it with my data, still overwhelmingly prefer using such services.
For every scandal about data leakage, 3rd party access and etc., the social media websites are still top used apps. People don't want their privacy/secrets/photos to be available to people they know, or might know. They don't really care about "giant faceless company"/government, even though they say they do.
I don't think paywalling a non-fucked experience is a good solution for... anything, really. Like why do we have to charge people to get out of the fuck barrel? How about we just not have it?
yes, i agree with this. the context of my answer was n the even we have to have an appstore at all; personally i'd rather download an app from a website (and signed with their certificate, for example) than slog through a 'store'
reply