←back to thread

Has the cost of building software dropped 90%?

(martinalderson.com)
413 points martinald | 1 comments | 08 Dec 25 19:00 UTC | HN request time: 0.303s | source
Show context
tangotaylor ◴[09 Dec 25 12:42 UTC] No.46204312[source]▶
> Engineers need to really lean in to the change in my opinion.

I tried leaning in. I really tried. I'm not a web developer or game developer (more robotics, embedded systems). I tried vibe coding web apps and games. They were pretty boring. I got frustrated that I couldn't change little things. I remember getting frustrated that my game character kept getting stuck on imaginary walls and kept asking Cursor to fix it and it just made more and more of a mess. I remember making a simple front-end + backend with a database app to analyze thousands of pull request comments and it got massively slow and I didn't know why. Cursor wasn't very helpful in fixing it. I felt dumber after the whole process.

The next time I made a web app I just taught myself Flask and some basic JS and I found myself moving way more quickly. Not in the initial development, but later on when I had to tweak things.

The AI helped me a ton with looking things up: documentation, error messages, etc. It's essentially a supercharged Google search and Stack Overflow replacement, but I did not find it useful letting it take the wheel.

replies(9): >>46204550 #>>46205027 #>>46206045 #>>46206421 #>>46206931 #>>46210894 #>>46211263 #>>46211291 #>>46216142 #
r_lee ◴[09 Dec 25 13:08 UTC] No.46204550[source]▶
These posts like the one OP made is why I'm losing my mind.

Like, is there truly an agentic way to go 10x or is there some catch? At this point while I'm not thrilled about the idea of just "vibe coding" all the time, I'm fine with facing reality.

But I keep having the same experience as you, or rather leaning more on that supercharged Google/SO replacement

or just a "can you quickly make this boring func here that does xyz" "also add this" or for bash scripts etc.

And that's only when I've done most of the plumbing myself.

replies(19): >>46204630 #>>46204766 #>>46204828 #>>46204843 #>>46204925 #>>46205328 #>>46205478 #>>46205659 #>>46205781 #>>46205890 #>>46205913 #>>46205924 #>>46205931 #>>46206330 #>>46207518 #>>46209875 #>>46214153 #>>46214479 #>>46214591 #
1. JeremyNT ◴[09 Dec 25 14:48 UTC] No.46205478[source]▶
> Like, is there truly an agentic way to go 10x or is there some catch? At this point while I'm not thrilled about the idea of just "vibe coding" all the time, I'm fine with facing reality.

Below is based on my experience using (currently) mostly GPT-5 with open source code assistants.

For a new project with straightforward functionality? I think you (and "you" being "basically anybody who can code at all") can probably manage to go 10x the pace of a junior engineer of yesteryear.

Things get a lot trickier when you have complex business logic to express and backwards compatibility to maintain in an existing codebase. Writing out these kinds of requirements in natural language is its own skillset (which can be developed), and this process takes time in and of itself.

The more confusing the requirements, the more error prone the process becomes though. The model can do things "correctly" but oops maybe you forgot something in your description, and now the whole thing will be wrong. And the fact that you didn't write the code means that you missed out on your opportunity to fix / think about stuff in the first pass of implementation (i.e. you need to seriously review stuff, which also slow you down).

Sometimes iterating over English instructions will take longer than just writing/expressing things in code from the start. But sometimes it will be a lot faster too.

Basically the easy stuff is way easier but the more complex stuff is still going to require a lot of hand holding and a lot of manual review.