News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by randusername on Saturday January 31, 2026 @09:58AM (#46837226)
No more AI thought pieces until you tell us what you build!

AI is a general-purpose tool, but that doesn't mean best-practices and wisdom are generalizable. Web dev is different than compilers which is different than embedded and all the differences of opinion in the comments never explain who does what.

That said, I would take this up a notch:

> If you ask AI to write a document for you, you might get 80% of the deep quality you’d get if you wrote it yourself for 5% of the effort. But, now you’ve also only done 5% of the thinking.

Writing _is_ the thinking. It's a critical input in developing good taste. I think we all ought to consider a maintenance dose. Write your own code without assistance on whatever interval makes sense to you, otherwise you'll atrophy those muscles. Best-practices are a moving train, not something that you learned once and you're done.

Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by bodge5000 on Saturday January 31, 2026 @10:17AM (#46837378)
> No more AI thought pieces until you tell us what you build!

Absolutely agree with this, the ratio of talk to output is insane, especially when the talk is all about how much better output is. So far the only example I've seen is Claude Code which is mired in its own technical problems and is literally built by an AI company.

> Write your own code without assistance on whatever interval makes sense to you, otherwise you'll atrophy those muscles

This is the one thing that concerns me, for the same reason as "AI writes the code, humans review it" does. The fact of the matter is, most people will get lazy and complacent pretty quickly, and the depth of which they review the code/ the frequency they "go it alone" will get less and less until eventually it just stops happening. We all (most of us anyway) do it, its just part of being human, for the same reason that thousands of people start going to the gym in January and stop by March.

Arguably, AI coding was at its best when it was pretty bad, because you HAD to review it frequently and there were immediate incentives to just take the keyboard and do it yourself sometimes. Now, we still have some serious faults, they're just not as immediate, which will lead to complacency for a lot of people.

Maybe one day AI will be able to reliably write the 100% of the code without review. The worry is that we stop paying attention first, which all in all looks quite likely

Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by Kerrick on Saturday January 31, 2026 @12:08PM (#46838454)
> Absolutely agree with this, the ratio of talk to output is insane, especially when the talk is all about how much better output is.

Those of us building are having so much fun we aren't slowing down to write think pieces.

I don't mean this flippantly. I'm a blogger. I love writing! But since a brief post on December 22 I haven't blogged because I have been too busy implementing incredible amounts of software with AI.

Since you'll want receipts, here they are:

- https://git.sr.ht/~kerrick/ratatui_ruby/tree/trunk/item/READ...

- https://git.sr.ht/~kerrick/rooibos/tree/trunk/item/README.rd...

- https://git.sr.ht/~kerrick/tokra/tree

Between Christmas and New Year's Day I was on vacation, so I had plenty of time. Since then, it's only been nights & weekends (and some early mornings and lunch breaks).

Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by yojat661 on Saturday January 31, 2026 @07:01PM (#46842184)
Are these software popular? Are these maintainable long term? Are you getting feedback from users?
Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by Kerrick on Sunday February 01, 2026 @06:45PM (#46850592)
RatatuiRuby is pretty new still: its beta launch was Jan 20. Octobox's TUI is built on it [0], and Sidekiq is using it to build theirs [1].

I believe they'll be maintainable long-term, as they've got extensive tests and documentation, and I built a theory of the program [2] on the Ruby side of it as I reviewed and guided the agent's work.

I am getting feedback from users, the largest of which drove the creation of (and iteration upon) Rooibos. As a rendering library, RatatuiRuby doesn't do much to guide the design or architecture of an application. Rooibos is an MVU/TEA framework [3] to do exactly that.

Tokra is basically a tech demo at this stage, [4] so (hopefully) no users yet.

[0]: https://ruby.social/@[email protected]/1159351822843...

[1]: https://ruby.social/@getajobmike/115940044592981164

[2]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/016560...

[3]: https://guide.elm-lang.org/architecture/

[4]: https://ruby.social/@kerrick/115983502510721565

Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by yojat661 on Sunday February 08, 2026 @06:22PM (#46939655)
Appreciate the response. My primary concern with llm coding is long term maintainability. The paper you linked seems interesting, will give it a read!
Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by g8oz on Saturday January 31, 2026 @11:03AM (#46837808)
But simonw said that dark factories are the way forward /s
Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by malfist on Saturday January 31, 2026 @02:11PM (#46839731)
Lights out manufacturing is always the boogieman that's being built or coming tomorrow. Never seems to happen though. The Wikipedia article for it only cites two such factories, and at least one of them requires humans still and isn't fully lights out.
Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by kranner on Saturday January 31, 2026 @09:01PM (#46842928)
It's a reference to this article about entirely automated software production (eventually and hypothetical): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46739117
Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by bartread on Saturday January 31, 2026 @11:54AM (#46838290)
> No more AI thought pieces until you tell us what you build!

Let me fix that for you:

No more AI thought pieces until you SHOW us what you build!

And I think it can safely be generalised to:

No more thought pieces until you show us what you build!

And that goes double for posts on LinkedIn.

Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by strange_quark on Saturday January 31, 2026 @12:56PM (#46838912)
I’d take it even further: I want to see the prompts! I’ll concede we’ve arrived at a point where the coding agents work, but I’m still unconvinced they’re actually saving anyone time. From my AI-pilled coworkers, it appears they’re all spending half an hour creating a plan with hyper-specific prompts, like “make this specific change to lines XXX-YYY in this file”, “move this function over here and change the args”, etc. As far as I can tell, this is current best practice, and I’ve tried it, but I’m always disappointed with the either the quality or the speed, usually both.
Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by dullcrisp on Saturday January 31, 2026 @01:41PM (#46839378)
Look learning vim is hard some people just want to describe their edits using natural language.
Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by tempodox on Saturday January 31, 2026 @01:54PM (#46839542)
Yea, if I were interested in that level of micromanagement, I would have become a manager.
Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by doug_durham on Saturday January 31, 2026 @11:17AM (#46837934)
Ample evidence of production software being produced with the aid of AI tools has been provided here on HN over the last year or more. This is a tiresome response. A later response says exactly what they produce.
Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by daveguy on Saturday January 31, 2026 @11:35AM (#46838119)
Most of what I see are toys. Could you point us to the examples of production software from AI? I feel like I see more "stop spamming us with AI slop" stories from open source than production software from AI. Would love some concrete examples. Specifically of major refactors or ground up projects. Not, "we just stared using AI in our production software." Because it can take a while to change the quality (better or worse) of a whole existing code base.
Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by jama211 on Saturday January 31, 2026 @12:30PM (#46838677)
Sounds like you’ve got multiple ways to write off any example you’re given charged up and at the ready.
Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by daveguy on Saturday January 31, 2026 @02:05PM (#46839675)
I was just asking for a non-confounded example of what was claimed. But okay.
Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by jama211 on Sunday February 01, 2026 @03:59AM (#46844660)
Ok, the web portal/learning management site for the university I work at. I’m part of a small team of 5 devs but not a single one of us has developed without the use of AI tooling in two years.

I’d say it’s rarer to find a dev who doesn’t use AI tools in their arsenal these days, that’s why your question sounds so odd to me.

Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by willtemperley on Saturday January 31, 2026 @12:36PM (#46838730)
I imagine people who are shipping with AI aren’t talking about it. Doing so makes no business sense.

Those not shipping are talking about it.

Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by techblueberry on Saturday January 31, 2026 @12:42PM (#46838784)
So, “trust me bro”? When people find a good tool, the can’t stop talking about it. See all the tech conferences.

Absence of evidence, while not the only signal, is a huge fucking signal.

Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by Ronsenshi on Saturday January 31, 2026 @02:09PM (#46839714)
From what I've seen it's not even "trust me bro", but "we are having so much fun 'building', we don't have time for anything else".
Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by doug_durham on Saturday January 31, 2026 @04:11PM (#46840899)
"Us"??? Most of "us" don't need to be convinced that AI as a software development tool has merit. The comment literally two below my comment says that they develop banking software. At this point you can be confident that most of the software that you use that has had recent updates has been developed with the aid of AI. Its use is ubiquitous.
Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by daveguy on Saturday January 31, 2026 @07:09PM (#46842239)
I didn't say AI as a software development doesn't have merit. I asked what production software was being produced from or predominantly with AI tools. I just see a lot more examples of "stop the slop" than I do of positive stories about AI being used to build something from scratch. I was hoping you had a concrete example in all of the hay. Are my expectations based on the hype too high?

That wasn't supposed to be an opportunity for you to get defensive, but an opportunity for you to show off awesome projects.

Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by gchamonlive on Saturday January 31, 2026 @10:50AM (#46837678)
Even if writing is thinking, which I don't think it's the case as writing is also feeling, but thinking isn't exclusively writing. Form is very important and AI can very well help you materialize an insight in a way that makes sense for a wider audience. The thinking is still all yours, only the aesthetics is refined by the AI with your guidance, depending on how you use AI.
Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by CuriouslyC on Saturday January 31, 2026 @10:15AM (#46837359)
I don't get why people think AI takes the thought out of writing. I write a lot, and when I start hitting keys on keyboards, I already know what I'm going to say 100% of the time, the struggle is just getting the words out in a way that maximizes reader comprehension/engagement.

I'd go so far as to say that for the vast majority of people, if you don't know what you're going to say when you sit down to write, THAT is your problem. Writing is not thinking, thinking is thinking, and you didn't think. If you're trying to think when you should be writing, that's a process failure. If you're not Stephen King or Dean Koontz, trying to be a pantser with your writing is a huge mistake.

What AI is amazing for is taking a core idea/thesis you provide it, and asking you a ton of questions to extract your knowledge/intent, then crystallizing that into an outline/rough draft.

Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by kranner on Saturday January 31, 2026 @11:00AM (#46837780)
And how do you know you're not as good as Stephen King or Dean Koontz if you never even try? What AI seems to be amazing for is to persuade people to freeze themselves in place and accept their overlord-assigned stations in life.

You're free to adopt this cynical and pessimistic outlook if you like but you're going a bit far trying to force it on others. Gawd.

Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by CuriouslyC on Saturday January 31, 2026 @11:05AM (#46837832)
"How do you know Michael Phelps's training routine isn't right for you if you don't spend 6 months following it?"

If your argument starts with "how do you know you're not the best in the world unless you try" you fucked up.

Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by kranner on Saturday January 31, 2026 @11:12AM (#46837900)
Following an Olympic champion's training routine is not a bad idea if you don't expect it to make you an Olympic champion! It might be a great improvement on your current training routine though, if you're interested in the sport at all.

The physical (and genetic) demands of athletics aside, we were talking about writing. Just starting on a lark is what worked for Haruki Murakami. Again, it's very unlikely you'll be the next Murakami. But at least you'll improve a lot at something you find interesting! What is the downside here, exactly? Unless you're an opportunity-cost-minimising, industrial-output-maximising kind of person. That's fine, but that's not everyone.

Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by CuriouslyC on Saturday January 31, 2026 @11:42AM (#46838187)
The routines Olympic champions follow are typically terrible for beginners. Michael Phelps's routine would destroy most swimmers, he has a ton of recovery assistance, he's got the bio mechanics 100% down so he doesn't accrue as much RSI, and he's just genetically gifted with a tolerance for a lot of exercise.

The same pattern holds at the elite levels of most things.

Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by kranner on Saturday January 31, 2026 @11:45AM (#46838212)
> The same pattern holds at the elite levels of most things.

How does it hold for writing?

Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by CuriouslyC on Saturday January 31, 2026 @02:00PM (#46839618)
Stephen King and Dean Koontz have been getting feedback from people and the market so long that their instincts are razor sharp and they have internalized a structure of stories and what will/wont move readers that they naturally lean on without having to puzzle things out the way a less accomplished writer would.

If you don't have that wisdom, trying to pants something is going to result in writing yourself in circles, contradictions, inconsistencies, incoherence of idea, etc.

Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by kranner on Saturday January 31, 2026 @08:47PM (#46842855)
I suppose the billionaire-assigned AI will let you know if you have the gift of King and Koontz or not.
Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by Ozzie_osman on Saturday January 31, 2026 @10:23AM (#46837444)
> No more AI thought pieces until you tell us what you build!

We build a personal finance tool (referenced in the article). It's a web/mobile/backend stack (mostly React and Python). That said, I think a lot of the principles are generalizable.

> Writing _is_ the thinking. It's a critical input in developing good taste.

Agree, but I'll add that _good_ prompt-writing actually requires a lot of thought (which is what makes it so easy to write bad prompts, which are much more likely to produce slop).

Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by jama211 on Saturday January 31, 2026 @12:32PM (#46838687)
“Writing is the thinking” is a controversial and open to interpretation take, so everyone’s gonna argue about it. You muddied the water with that one.
Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by fourthrigbt on Saturday January 31, 2026 @12:53PM (#46838885)
The product they build is literally mentioned in the post? It’s one of the more popular personal finance/budgeting apps, and it’s a pretty good one in my opinion as someone who has used a variety of them.
Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by solidasparagus on Saturday January 31, 2026 @01:20PM (#46839146)
The first sentence of the blog post has a link to the product he is building - https://www.monarch.com/
Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by twism on Saturday January 31, 2026 @02:11PM (#46839735)
with the AI
Re:A Step Behind the Bleeding Edge: A Philosophy on AI in Dev by bandrami on Saturday January 31, 2026 @05:58PM (#46841757)
I'm really losing patience with AI fluff pieces mostly because I'm a sysadmin and the guys in dev cannot stop talking about how much they're producing with their agents or MCPs or whatever they're called this week and yet they're simply not getting me software to put into production any faster (it's actually slowed down slightly but that's consistent with previous product lifecycles). Neither are any of our vendors, at least as far as I can tell. Even Agile a quarter of a century ago actually produced software at a somewhat faster rate than the team had before (at the cost of more breakage, but there's a business case to be made for that) but I'm literally just not seeing an uptick here.