←back to thread

Using LLMs at Oxide

(rfd.shared.oxide.computer)
694 points steveklabnik | 4 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
thundergolfer ◴[] No.46178458[source]
A measured, comprehensive, and sensible take. Not surprising from Bryan. This was a nice line:

> it’s just embarrassing — it’s as if the writer is walking around with their intellectual fly open.

I think Oxide didn't include this in the RFD because they exclusively hire senior engineers, but in an organization that contains junior engineers I'd add something specific to help junior engineers understand how they should approach LLM use.

Bryan has 30+ years of challenging software (and now hardware) engineering experience. He memorably said that he's worked on and completed a "hard program" (an OS), which he defines as a program you doubt you can actually get working.

The way Bryan approaches an LLM is super different to how a 2025 junior engineer does so. That junior engineer possibly hasn't programmed without the tantalizing, even desperately tempting option to be assisted by an LLM.

replies(9): >>46178592 #>>46178622 #>>46178776 #>>46179419 #>>46180863 #>>46180957 #>>46180987 #>>46181685 #>>46184735 #
zackerydev ◴[] No.46178622[source]
I remember in the very first class I ever took on Web Design the teacher spent an entire semester teaching "first principles" of HTML, CSS and JavaScript by writing it in Notepad.

It was only then did she introduce us to the glory that was Adobe Dreamweaver, which (obviously) increased our productivity tenfold.

replies(4): >>46178918 #>>46179179 #>>46179520 #>>46179979 #
frankest ◴[] No.46179179[source]
DreamWeaver absolutely destroyed the code with all kinds of tags and unnecessary stuff. Especially if you used the visual editor. It was fun for brainstorming but plain notepad with clean understandable code was far far better (and with the browser compatibility issues the only option if you were going to production).
replies(4): >>46179345 #>>46179408 #>>46179671 #>>46180923 #
1. BobbyTables2 ◴[] No.46179671[source]
MS FrontPage also went out of its way to do the same.
replies(2): >>46179708 #>>46180254 #
2. pram ◴[] No.46179708[source]
It’s funny this came up, because it was kinda similar to the whole “AI frauds” thing these days.

I don’t particularly remember why, but “hand writing” fancy HTML and CSS used to be a flex in some circles in the 90s. A bunch of junk and stuff like fixed positioning in the source was the telltale sign they “cheated” with FrontPage or Dreamweaver lol

replies(1): >>46180054 #
3. supriyo-biswas ◴[] No.46180054[source]
My only gripe was that they tended to generate gobs of “unsemantic” HTML. You resized a table and expect it to be based on viewport width? No! It’s hardcoded “width: X px” to whatever your size the viewport was set to.
4. _joel ◴[] No.46180254[source]
It might have been pretty horrible but I hold Frontpage 97 with fond memories, it started my IT career, although not for HTML reasons.

The _vti_cnf dir left /etc/passwd downloadable, so I grabbed it from my school website. One Jack the Ripper later and the password was found.

I told the teacher resposible for the IT it was insecure and that ended up getting me some work experience. Ended up working the summer (waiting for my GCSE results) for ICL which immeasurably helped me when it was time to properly start working.

Did think about defacing, often wonder that things could have turned out very much differently!