Hacker News Reader

Comment by niwtsol | Hacker News Reader

You don't use AI at all? What is your main justification for not?

I don't like outsourcing learning and prefer to do the actual learning. Just like taking notes via recorder vs writing them down during a lecture causes you to not remember the information as well. Allowing something else to create your code tends to mean you're not going to remember/know the how/why it works and you just accept it works and moves on. Eventually you don't know how any of it works and you're totally dead in the water without the LLM. My understanding of the code I write is much more valuable than some arbitrary deadline that means nothing

Do you also inspect and study what assembly code your program was compiled to?

// Obviously LLMs are non-determenistic etc and it depends on your domain, but your VP's point 100% makes sense if you folks are trying to cook up another demo-CRUD apps to convince investors for another funding round

I keep hearing this argument on HN. Yes, if performance is something you care about you totally look at the disassembly. You don’t even need to write assembly, just be able to read it. By now I assume that programmers who argue they don’t need to understand and review what the LLM generates for them are simply not that skilled and don’t realize that skilled programmers do this.

If you're just building a non-security-sensitive frontend to validate market traction, it makes total sense to go full AI. The commenter working at a 10-person company getting flamed for not using AI to iterate aggresively against competitors has a super valid point.

Validation methods will evolve to accommodate human laziness. Insisting on doing it the hard way is no different than the old-timers who used to claim engineers 'weren't skilled' if they didn't know how to use punch cards.

Ad hominem. Skilled programmers != old-timers calling others unskilled. Who does fuzz testing, automated integration tests, etc already, that LLMs need as a test harness? It’s not the vibe coders saying “nobody reads assembly anyway” as an argument.

I simplified this argument to highlight that we’ve seen this exact pattern before.

I'd definitely say IntelliJ improved my productivity. No one cared. If anything, management viewed it as a nuisance as they had to deal with the license.

Now there is demands to justify not using AI like this, but people don't care about details. Which AI tool I use apparently doesn't matter at all, even if there are presumably productivity differences between them.

Edit: typo

Seems like you should have a justification for introducing a new tool instead, no? There are thousands of other tools they're also not using, but we're not asking about those.

I'm not the same person, but I don't really use it. I write better code than an LLM, and I do it faster than the time it takes to review and correct the LLM's bad code. The tool has no value to offer me.

!RemindMe 2 years

Reply on news.ycombinator.com