Interesting and justifiable. But a contrast to work being done by Qiusheng Wu and contributors of the GeoLibre and RustGIS projects, who seem all in on AI generated code (and it's working fairly well at the moment).
As a domain expert, I spent all my time learning my scientific niche, and only a small bit on practical coding. Now I can manifest the ideas I formerly needed to hire developers for. WAY more fun.
Yep. Now you get to focus on actually solving the problems at hand rather than messing around typing thousands of loc of irrelevant boilerplate to get something to work.
If the discussion was "Sitting in a submarine is not as fun as scuba-diving", I would recognize the conversation is not about me, and not jump in and tell all of the recreational scuba-divers they're wrong.
it's 2026. people can't understand when things aren't for them. they will see a french onion soup recipe and comment "any dairy and onion free version?"
Yes. Who says people must enjoy coding? People enjoy trying new things and building new products, and coding isn't the goal, it's just the tool you use use to get to your goal. If now you can build things without you doing the coding part, then why is that bad?
I think this berating of people who don't enjoy coding is cope and bile by coders who feel being left behind by an industry who only values the end product and doesn't care about their idealist craft for the code, but this always had been the case. People bought Half-Life because the game was good, not because the code was written with enjoyment by the devs(Valve source code is full of swear words).
There's plenty of products with shit code that sell well, and plenty of products with good code that don't sell and bankrupt the company. The end-product is king, not the code. Did Steve Jobs just care about the end product UX or about how nice the code inside was?
GGP was being judgemental on people not enjoy coding, which means for him the default status quo is that one has to enjoy coding, therefore my assessment was correct.
Nobody. But everyone is saying that I must stop coding by hand or get left behind. I really like understanding what I'm building and creating works of art in code. The sense of accomplishment is gone.
But we can still be sad that we can't get paid to do something we enjoy anymore, right? I'm planning to leave the industry once my role at this company is up. The fun is gone now and I don't want to do the new form of the job.
Yes, you don't need anyone's permission to be sad.
I enjoy the act of coding, but my ambition to create almost always exceeded my ability and the number of hours in the day. So the transition from coder (and sometimes manager) to agent orchestrator has been fairly positive.
It's not necessarily easy or pleasant to evolve, but that's life.
I didn't say it's natural. It was unnatural when the internet started taking over, when humans, first shifted to office work, and for every other major technological advancement before that.
I think the cat was out of the bag as soon as OpenAI proved that scaling up transformers was effective. I don't think the way it's playing out is particularly good for normal people, but the advancement of these models can't be stopped.
The light at the end of the tunnel is hardware advancement and open models. In 5 or 10 years if we can run an Opus 5.5+ model on a local device, things might not turn out so bad.
There is a huge skill gap arising in using LLMs. You have some people (like me) who are able to direct LLMs and get them to produce (nearly) perfect code, while there's others who can't even get them to make a CRUD website without exploding.
Yeah, i've seen this when others shown. We're no longer in the days when you just copy and paste code snippets in the browser window, nor just dump and entire codebase in the harness and letting it rip, there's an entire new skill tree on how to use each model and harness correctly for maximum gains and bypassing various context hiccups.
>You have some people (like me) who are able to direct LLMs and get them to produce (nearly) perfect code, while there's others who can't even get them to make a CRUD website without exploding.
Well it seems unfair to compare anyone to your brilliance.
Didn't you just accuse someone above of not enjoying coding as if that's somehow a must?
>But everyone is saying that I must stop coding by hand or get left behind.
Nobody here is saying that. People are saying whether you enjoy coding or not, doesn't matter for the end product if it does the job just as well. When people buy an iPhone, a pair of Nikes, or some other China made nicknack off Amazon, they don't care if the factory workers who assembled it enjoyed their time on the assembly line making stuff for you, or if they're sweatshop workers assembling your stuff in absolute pain and misery, they care if the end product in their hand satisfies them.
>I really like understanding what I'm building and creating works of art in code.
Is passionate code something customers are willing to pay a premium for versus the AI written one, or do customers only care about the end product and nobody gives a shit if it was vibecoded or whether you poured your soul in the code?
>To be fair, I've definitely seen that said multiple times on HN, even if not in this particular thread.
To be fair, after talking to AI devs on the frontline at a local meetup, I learned that models, agents and harnesses have so many edge cases, traps and footguns, that aren't really well documented anywhere, especially visible on large codebases, that you really need to stay up to date to keep up and squeeze the best out of each model for your intended use case.
For both US and China models - what standard security checks and QaQc are you all doing? We're running small gamuts to test for unsolicited jailbreaks (model jailbreaks you) and incorrect records (Fake Accuracy - as Easter Egg or common thread) meaning falsified logic or information cooked in by the developers, rather than the training data speaking for itself
reply