←back to thread

413 points martinald | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.417s | source
Show context
DrewADesign ◴[] No.46199989[source]
As I said in a previous post:

I think the 90/90 rule comes into play. We all know Tom Cargill quote (even if we’ve never seen it attributed):

The first 90 percent of the code accounts for the first 90 percent of the development time. The remaining 10 percent of the code accounts for the other 90 percent of the development time.

It feels like a gigantic win when it carves through that first 90%… like, “wow, I’m almost done and I just started!” And it ‘is’ a genuine win! But for me it’s dramatically less useful after that. The things that trip up experienced developers really trip up LLMs and sometimes trying to break the task down into teeny weeny pieces and cajole it into doing the thing is worse than not having it.

So great with the backhoe tasks but mediocre-to-counterproductive with the shovel tasks. I have a feeling a lot of the impressiveness depends on which kind of tasks take up most of your dev time.

If your job is pumping out low-effort websites that are essentially marketing tools for small businesses, it must feel like magic. I think the more magical it feels for your use case, the less likely your use case will be earning you a living 2 years from now.

replies(3): >>46200091 #>>46207358 #>>46207851 #
janalsncm ◴[] No.46200091[source]
Yeah, I think the more your job demands correctness in novel scenarios the less impressed you are with these shiny demos. I encourage anyone to pause the demo once the thing is generated and stare at what it did. Is it genuinely correct and impressive? Are you impressed because it made a thing generally shaped like what you expected, or because it would be genuinely impressive (or even adequate) if a person did it?
replies(1): >>46203234 #
saikia81 ◴[] No.46203234[source]
you are right, but the inverse doesn't have to be. There is a factor that could make the work so cheap, that people don't care about the quality anymore.
replies(1): >>46212716 #
1. DrewADesign ◴[] No.46212716[source]
The only way that state would be sustainable is if we suddenly solved code vulnerabilities, or the damage they cause.
replies(1): >>46229725 #
2. saikia81 ◴[] No.46229725[source]
Most companies have more than enough of those, and these problems are already solved every day. In the end everything is vulnerable and the internet is dangerous, a vibe coder is no more dangerous than an average junior software engineer.