[dead]
I think it's the opposite. When I'm on the edges of Real Difficult Stuff (TM), then LLMs are less of help compared to when I just need basic web applications or similar "beginner stuff". If what you're working on doesn't exists in the training data at all, the LLMs can sometimes be more in the way than helpful, as they don't seem to even "grasp" the problems correctly.
I still get tons of productivity boosts from LLMs, don't get me wrong, and I wouldn't stop working with them even though they aren't perfect for everything, they do with a lot of monotonous tasks, like all the stuff you outlined. But the moments I'm working without LLMs, that's the time I'm working very much on "not beginner stuff".
"Make me this thing there are a million examples of" vs. "make me this unique thing in this exact, particular way".
I don't think there's anything an LLM can't write given enough direction. (It's a one-sentence fuck-it one-off on one end of the spectrum, and it degenerately ends with you giving it exact code and prompting it to echo it back to you on the other.)
But the jobs of making basic apps and web pages are the new WordPress jobs in terms of pay, I'd agree.
I'm sure these will be much better as soon as enough data is in the training set, as always. GPT models used to be horrible at electrical stuff as well, today Astra seems pretty OK at it. It changes as they keep extending what use cases are covered by training data and what they test for and so on.
Interesting because by then codebases might have become so complex that these can no longer be modified, maintained nor understood by humans, so replacing AI with HI (human intelligence) will simply no longer possible.
That then represents a certain vendor lock-in or Mafia stand off: either keeping paying or have all the code go up in smoke.
Certainly not everyone will be facing this dilemma, but it certainly isn’t sci-fi considering the track-record of big tech.
Or perhaps AGI is reached and suddenly AI solves this all by itself.
It's also confusing that the term AI has become synonymous with LLMs as it covers other things like text prediction/correction.
So AI can be a tool or a service depending on how you are using it and what you are using it for.
The danger of vibe coded SaaS:es isn't the customer building the thing themselves, but that the increased competition drives down the profit margin.
Aside - is AI still DIY? We need a new DAIY category for AI empowered works?
I just think devs are coping by thinking that saas startups have any barrier to entry at all. You are now competing with every single person on the planet who wants to make money sitting at home on a computer, and likely the business guy with zero skill or craftsmanship is going to beat you. The only thing with barrier to entry is insanely complex software (e.g., what used to take a genius team of 10 multiple years to make) and or more creative software like video games (where you need extreme care and taste to get something anyone will look at for > 2 hours).
Average saas products require no skill or craftsmanship and literally anyone including our grandmas can make it (assuming they will take a few months at least to chat with an LLM). To be clear I think this is great! More better software, people with smaller needs can have llms build it for them totally bespoke. For those of us with skills we have to move WAY out of our old comfort zone and make way cooler things, a standard saas that takes a few months isn't something we should waste our time on anymore.
No, it's not at all DIY. I cringe any time I see someone say "I made X" and it's vibe coded, because they haven't actually made anything.
Each of those customers, who also have access to LLMs and can therefore bypass his LLM built service by making their own LLM built service. Cameras in phones didn't turn everyone into a professional photographer, it gave everyone the ability to take pics, as badly composited as they are, they fulfill their purpose. On the few life occasions where a professional is needed, you don't go for a smartphone-based photographer, you go for an old school professional photographer. I think software will be the same. These 50 year olds won't be selling to anyone. And if they are, it won't be for long.
Reasonable thing was to pay $39 and forget about it.
Maybe there are cases where those constraints don't degrade utility to the point where your product is now worse than the best open source alternative, but they're few and far between.
And I think the people it doesn't appeal to, I think we need perspectives like theirs.
I find people that are the "unconscious incompetence" stage of software development absolutely love them because they produce output that looks fine to them and they can't find anything wrong with it because they simply lack the ability to perceive quality. For a contact widget that might be acceptable as it will be used a few dozen times so who cares if it breaks, but let's not pretend you can actually build a compliant e-signing or invoicing software without having domain expertise and investing a ton of editing/revision time.
Put more bluntly, a domain expert that, as of currently, refuses to use LLMs can easily start using LLMs in their work, an idiot who uses LLMs cannot easily become a domain expert. Now let's think about who you would rather hire or who do you think will have the better future career outlook. Pretty damning how many people here are willing to reject the idea that domain expertise or ability to write program code yourself is a waste of resources.
But: there's a complex business related project I care deeply about. Due to corporate red tape and office politics I couldn't fix it the way I wanted to when I actually worked there, but after I left, I built the solution I had in mind (mostly out of frustration at first, but it's starting to look like a viable product). And thanks to LLMs, I can tackle it on a much larger scale, build it faster, control it better (to my surprise), and I can also plan the really business aspects around it, including how to sell something like this, which is absolutely a first for me.
So I feel like thanks to Claude, I can actually solve problems more effectively, on a larger scale, and I feel like I'm now working on a higher level than ever before.
Compare it to the step from thinking about memory allocation and loop indices to thinking about algorithmic complexity, performance and memory footprint. From thinking about a single feature request to thinking about how the program can solve a complex business problem. Perhaps I'm more architect than programmer now, but I'm still deeply involved with the code, even if Claude now writes most of it. I'm still having fun. Although that might also partially be because I'm free from that restrictive corporate environment and can actually do what I want. (For now; eventually I do have to figure out how to make money from this.)
> LLMs
It’s probably worth doing a very thorough audit of how you’re handling user-uploaded files, it’s full of non-obvious footguns.