Hacker News Reader

Comment by hmokiguess | Hacker News Reader

The velocity of how this space gets reskinned is wild.

Clearly we do not yet feel satisfied with the way we consume and work with agents at scale.

It looks like perhaps rather than skinning we need a more novel UX or workflow to emerge.

I can't help but think all of this is living on borrowed time and eventually it will look more like talking to your "assistant" that fields everything for you and maybe some new async interruption model that fits humans better.

Biggest bottleneck in my opinion still is how to solve for information density.

View on HN

Thanks so much for saying this!

Even with a single instance of Claude Code, running I am producing so much code that it is impossible to even self-review.

Can we please focus on that?

Self-review is an anti-pattern.

Proofreading an essay before submitting it is an anti pattern?

you don't proof read your speech writer. politicians don't even know what they will read until they start reading in the podium for example. ...not that i think it's good, but people have stopped caring mostly

Good politicians do. They at least skim it to see where to add emphasis and the points they want to promote.

Really good politicians work with their speechwriters to get across exactly what they want to communicate.

i guarantee you even good politicians only pre-read important speeches.

during campaign, you spew so much bs, and to so many demographics, you would be hindered by thinking about what youre talkinh, sadly.

And politicians are a famously well-loved group of people

The good ones are and I don’t even need to name names.

Do you proofread the compiler’s output?

The compiler's output is reproducible and trustable in the extreme majority of the cases, as opposed to the piles of dogshit trained on the worst javascript practices that LLMs put out nondeterministically.

Just to be clear, when I say that it is impossible even to self review, it was an indication of how difficult is to review code of colleagues.

So much this. We don't review the assembly/machine-code that the compiler creates, why do we still review the code the AI generates?

If it works as desired then ship it; if it doesn't then iterate until it does.

_because compiling a code language into machine language is deterministic_.

If you think that compiling and explaining in English something to an LLM so it outputs code is the same activity, I just hope to never have you as a coworker.

Don’t want to be an asshole but the pattern I have observed is that people who were not qualified / competent to code before November of 2022 have this mentality.

They want to make you feel dumb and useless with your software development knowledge.

If it works as desired then ship it

Before AI, this was a joke.

Because the compiler does a deterministic transform on the input. And the input is less ambiguous than natural language and following more strict rules.

Why ask obvious things?

This is only OK where “it works” is the only criteria for accepting a software change.

That's such an AI bro take

Did you re-read your comment before hitting reply?

We simply need neural implant technology to overclock our brains, making the world (and its Claude instances) appear to go slower.

You got downvoted but your joke made me think of the show The Dark Matter and how they had the concept of a hallway with infinite doors to represent the multiverse to the human brain that cannot comprehend the state of superposition.

I sort of get what you're going for maybe? In a sense these things are gonna evolve at a rate where we are not going to be able to operate at their plane and we will need a sort of UX translation

I built some tools that lets me view diffs and summon agents to execute changes. You can probably vibe code that in a few minutes.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com