--- start quote ---
- Just what kind of evidence do you suppose they could have?
- Showing actual improved products and features. Showing actual code. etc.
--- end quote ---
Note how you provided neither. It's just claims.
> Anyway AI for sure increased project cadence by at least 2x.
As in: you claim this. Also, no one denies that you can ship a lot of code much faster with AI. However, somehow, very little actual evidence of grandiose claims (see farther up in the context) besides anecdotal "I'm so faster and features are being shipped left and right".
See also a sibling comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48158565
I think it's a great example of using LLMs effectively. In the end becoming more productive is understanding where LLMs work great and where they fail miserably.
But it is a step similar to, say going from assembly to a higher-level programming language, not the silver bullet that AI astroturfers like you to believe (fire all the programmers to buy more tokens!)
I’m currently working on a rewrite of an app that originally took two years. It’s been about three months, and I’m probably about 70% done. It’s a total “from scratch” rewrite; both client and server (two versions of each, as I also have administrative code). It’s a pretty big system, for one guy. I couldn’t do it, without the LLM.
It’s not been a cakewalk. I’ve needed to toss out large swaths of LLM-generated code, and rewrite by hand, but, for the most part, it’s been a huge help.
But I’m also not doing it in a manner that eats tokens. I just use the standard $20/month subscription as a chat. I suspect my workflow is not one that Anthropic or OpenAI really wants out there.
But I also bet that many HN accounts are bots; although I think many may be ones run by enthusiasts, not some AI cabal.
Other than that, I am not boosting AI, and have absolutely zero interest in doing a bunch of work to satisfy some random Internet Guy, who can't be bothered to examine my pretty damn extensive open portfolio.
I was just talking about my personal experience.
> random Internet Guy, who can't be bothered to examine my pretty damn extensive open portfolio.
You cannot even be bothered to examine the comment you reply to, maybe get off your high horse.
And the main part of my comment was about something in the common realm, open source software, and hard performance/quality improvements. Not wishy-washy products and features, not yet another tone deaf cool story.
For instance, I checked out yours, and there's not much, except a whole bunch of challenging people here. I am wondering if you came here to "set us straight." I know that a lot of folks have low opinions of HN, and not all of them are wrong, but I find this place a fairly good place to hang out. Being challenged, is one of the draws, for me.
By the way, have you tried the new unhomogenized heavy cream? Good stuff!
Have a great day!
Not everyone is you. E.g. I don't expect he answer to "show your work" be no answer and "why didn't you check my profile".
My answer to "show your work" was "No." I am not going to go through my code, and show a bunch of supporting evidence for a casual comment, in which I have exactly zero investment. I really don't care that much what people think of me. I was just sharing my personal experience. If you guys want to write me off, then knock yourselves out.
"No" is a complete sentence. What part of "No" didn't he understand?
Have a great day!
An interesting answer to literally "Just what kind of evidence do you suppose they could have? - Showing actual improved products and features. Showing actual code. etc."
> "No" is a complete sentence. What part of "No" didn't he understand?
See above. After pointing this out you immediately started down the path of "why didn't you looko at my profile and followed the link to my github".
Not even close. The opposite even. Read more carefully.
> For 5 million comments like yours I haven't seen a single one with the old code vs. the new code. I understand that not all code is public that way, of course, and I don't mean to put you on the spot personally. But where are all the open source projects that now do the same with better error handling using less resources?
Same here :)
> not some AI cabal.
There are enough enthusiasts to make it feel like one. Also an unhealthy doze of marketers, people buying into hype, AI psychosis etc.
There's absolutely no question that AI is a real thing, and that there's going to be a lot of money made, so there's a bunch of folks with commercial interest in pushing it.
It's just different from crypto. This has actual real-world utility for just about everyone. I am increasingly hearing people say "Ask ChatGPT," where they used to say "Google It" (where they used to say "Look it Up at the Library").
But your anecdote is much more balanced and more in line with my personal findings. Not like all the AI astroturfing that happens here. I like to use LLMs as well, but in a very targeted way in places where LLMs shine.
Yes, LLMs can make you much more productive. But so could assembly -> C -> Python or Rust, or switching an IDE with code completion and support for refactoring. Each step makes you more productive.
Sure, LLMs can spit out greenfields projects. But on large projects with complex requirements, you still need senior engineers to guide them, carefully review the output, and as you say throw out code and write it from scratch in a better way.
I had some friends who ended up in bits of AI psychosis. They exclaim that a swarm of agents was writing all their code, but every time I ask them to show the end-result, all they have is a pile of code that they don't understand, nor doesn't really work either. At the same time, they stopped getting any actual work done.
At any rate, somebody had a great analogy on HN recently: think of it is a vector, LLMs can significantly increase the magnitude of the vector, but you still have to make sure that the orientation of the vector is correct.
Great analogy!