mrcsharp

I think it's because not many know how to measure it properly.

I can output 5 useless/bad features in a day with Claude or I can output 1 useful feature per 2 day period. Which one has better impact on ROI?

In this example, it might seem like it's an easy answer. But, in the real world, it is a lot more nuanced and much more difficult to measure and so not many are bothering to do it and are opting in for the simple solution of following the hype.

> planning every last detail before writing code is boring

Not only that but you can't really plan everything. It is impossible. Without LLMs, with every line of code you are making a decision or discovering something new that must be dealt with or realizing how the current thing might impact something else and so on.

There is no way for a programmer to consider all of these little things ahead of time and if an attempt is made, it will take as long as actually writing that code.

> Within reason

Reason dictates having redundancy in place. Having prepared scenarios for what to do. A lot of countries clearly don't have that and they are operating on the assumption that no major disruption is going to happen.

Depending on resources coming from historically unstable locations and not having plans to prepare for such instability is just foolish.

Because a competent country/government should plan ahead for shortages of any vital resource it depends on.

I recently built a home server and used Noctua fans for the first time. I absolutely love how quiet they are. If I didn't know the room had my server in it and was running, I wouldn't even notice the very quiet sound of the fans.

I am running them at about 800rpm and the CPU is usually between 33~37 degrees.

When I rebuild my main PC, I will surely go with them again.

This is the first thing I read this morning and I'm not even a dad yet (or maybe never).

I miss this side of HN nowadays.

For me, almost every single time a conversation like this happens in real life it boils down to the one side claiming that "This is the future" and "Don't get left behind" followed by a torrent of hype and buzzwords. So no, there is no interesting conversations to be had about LLM programming anymore.

Fair enough. I misunderstood.

Please read the article.

> The WSJ report added that the rule is expected to make quarterly reporting optional and not eliminate it altogether.

So companies can still do their quarterly reporting if they and their investors want that.

I thought it was 72.

English is my 3rd language. I still disagree with using an LLM to write on one's behalf. I either get to read your thoughts in your voice or the comment is getting a downvote/flag.

> AI is a great equalizer when it comes to communication in English.

Good argument for it but I think 80/20 split applies here. It is likely that 80% of the time it is used to farm for upvotes and add noise.

> And despite what people say, the way you write is very much judged as an indication of your education and intelligence.

I have come across plenty of content and online interactions in English where English was the Author's 2nd or even 3rd language and I find that putting a small disclaimer about this fact is more than enough to bypass such judgement.

One thing not mentioned here is the Photos app. Out of the box, it is the default way to view images on Windows. That app is so bloated and slow to start that Microsoft announced they were going to preload it as well so it "starts" faster.

Using React in core parts of the Windows Shell, Microsof's inability to design and release an application using non-web technologies, and the sluggishness and lagginess and bloat of Windows in general has finally pushed me to dual boot Fedora on a separate drive.

It is very nice having an Operating system that respects the Hardware I own and makes efficient use of it. My experience has been very good so far. Every device in my custom built desktop PC worked immediately. The only driver I had to build and install was for my XBOX Wireless dongle.

Gaming has been really damn good. I installed Steam and my games just worked. No fiddling around with configs or anything. Even installing a custom Proton version to try it out is very simple.

I've been on Fedora now for nearly a month and only boot into Windows for work. Eventually, I might get rid of Windows entirely. It'll take a massive U-turn from Microsoft on the philosophy for Windows for me to change my opinion now.

My personal blog that I write in every now and then: https://blog.mrcsharp.dev

Mostly dev-related topics but I'm trying to write about more than just that.

And btw, this is a brilliant idea. I've already found 2 sites in adding to my bookmarks.

I think the "for me" part is implied with pieces like these.

It's always been this way with any hype cycle. This one is just the latest iteration.

Chill out buddy. You're going to pop a vein here.

A typical backend developer using C#/Java is likely solving more complicated problems and having all the concerns of an enterprise system to worry about and maintain.

Dismissing a dev or a system because it is enterprisy is a weak argument to make against a language. A language being used a lot in an enterprise to carry the weight of the business is a sign the language is actually great and reliable enough.

> Nobody cares about this

And that was my point. The choice of using JS/TS for LLM stuff was made for us based on initial wave of SDK availabilities. Nothing to do with language merits.

> It also has TypeScript which pairs well with agentic coding loops

The language syntax has nothing to do with it pairing well with agentic coding loops.

Considering how close Typescript and C# are syntactically, and C#'s speed advantage over JS among many other things would make C# the main language for building Agents. It is not and that's because the early SDKs were JS and Python.

C# has AOT compilation producing native, single file assemblies. A bit behind on this compared to Go, but it's there.

Sadly, this will be the trend with things moving forward. JS is perceived as a good language and LLMs are meant to make them even easier to write. It is not about the mertis of a language. It's about which languages LLMs are "good" at.

That doesn't make sense either. Agents already have access to MCPs and Tools. Your example is solved by having an S3 wrapper as a set of tools.

> It’s at what level of complexity does QA become necessary.

This is a good point. My answer would be that it depends on how many depend on the software and what is the tolerance for unintended interactions that users discover?

Based on which domain the software is written/deployed in, this answer will be different.

Bad analogy I think.

A table is a table. It has one core function. An argument can be made that it could be built in a way that a chair can't be pushed against it for example. But the number of such cases for a table are infinitely smaller than the number of edge cases and unexpected interactions a software system can have.

QA is a way to catch those edge cases that a single developer cannot find because of various reasons. One such reason is that devs are very close to their work and they might subconsciously not trigger the unhappy path in their code.

Testing if a table works is vastly different from testing a software system.

So conspiracy theories are cool again?

No, your "dear leader" didn't buy intel.

You're on HN not some crappy FB group. The bar is higher around here.

Are they reinventing how strip their clients of more money to produce more broken mess? [1]

This is all just so silly now.

[1] https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/2025/11/29/inside-t...

Adding and removing buttons from the UI is vastly different compared to maintaining a system where which features are enabled/disabled affect the underlying data and potentially interoperability.

Do you want to work on Oracle Database [1]?

By the way, I also don't want the software I use to suffer from quality drop due to new forced "features". I just don't think the way suggested here works well.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18442941

Would the question still be about measuring the drop in quality to prove that the product (the software in this case) is in breach of the law?

It doesn't need to. The author is voicing their opinion on the matter and is not attempting to conduct a scientific study and that is perfectly acceptable.