sdevonoes

6 ms·

1.
by sdevonoes 4d ago
> Business people can just directly convey what they want to the AI. Today, yes, this often leads to a mess. But for how long? As long as “business” people don’t wanna do the job and prefer to pay for it. It’s like, you can fix your own
2.
by sdevonoes 6d ago
But isn’t “grooming” the hardest part? To know the details means to know the codebases behind. So you do discovery, read code, ask people, check db tables, and then once you figure it out, you write a doc with the proposed solution. It gets
3.
by sdevonoes 7d ago
I would replace the eng. managers
4.
by sdevonoes 7d ago
> “the AI did it" to be any acceptable excuse. It will be depending on how much you paid. My bet is that in the near future normal people (like most of us) will be attended by AI in pretty much everywhere: the bank, the hospital, sh
5.
by sdevonoes 9d ago
Never understood the “skills” part tbh. Thse models are being trained in trillions of texts. Adding something small and particular about my codebase doesn’t really move the needle
6.
by sdevonoes 9d ago
AI as technology is cool and all, as cool as GCC or Linux or HTTP. The thing I don’t like about AI is that 99% of the time we talk about vendor-locked AI (claude, codex) and 99% of the time we use those. So you need to pay to use the models
7.
by sdevonoes 12d ago
Nah, LLM models are already the new compilers. A commodity only engineers know how to use (in the context of software engineering in production environments)
8.
by sdevonoes 14d ago
I think things would take longer to get done (and that’s fine for me tbh). The main usage of AI for me is to do discovery: if I am working on service A that has a dozen other services as dependencies, then I clone all the repos, point the a
9.
by sdevonoes 14d ago
Tip: include pictures of your machine. Not sure if I’m alone in this, but I love to see other people’s setups
10.
by sdevonoes 16d ago
Same interview process. Recruiter call, Live coding, System design, Behaviour interview. The only difference is that in the Live coding session they now allow AI to be used. I didn’t use it and went old way (because I had already rehearsed
11.
by sdevonoes 21d ago
I love to write code and solve problems in personal projects. I love to read interesting technical books. I love to learn certain new technologies. I hate doing the same at work. I couldn’t care less about my CEO’s product, nor about our li
12.
by sdevonoes 21d ago
If someone comes with a pretty decent idea and execution, it doesn’t really matter if code was written by human or llm, does it? Like if the next torvalds ships something great in the open, who cares how was it written.
13.
by sdevonoes 21d ago
I would love to buy the machine but I hate Tahoe.
14.
by sdevonoes 24d ago
So many things he got right (except you know what)
15.
by sdevonoes 29d ago
I won’t lie. I want to be Captain/Director, not the rower. It’s very satisfying to get rich by doing pretty much nothing. And there’s some sadness when some rower does their best but doesn’t even come close to directors/captain po
16.
by sdevonoes 1mo ago
Users don’t like shit, though.
17.
by sdevonoes 1mo ago
I think it depends on the job one has. Working as senior software engineer for international companies? Any western european country is nice and all. Top p90 salary. English only needed. Working as a bank cashier? Well, then you will notic
18.
by sdevonoes 2mo ago
The litmus test is this: do you enjoy consuming AI-generated stuff? I don’t. Whether it’s written text, or video, audio, restaurant menus, clothing pictures, documentation, airport control, ads… I do think there’s value in LLMs but as a sor
19.
by sdevonoes 2mo ago
Im not so sure if this is a pro or a con. Take two extremes at product building: brute force vs deep research first. I guess llms allow you to experiment quickly with many approaches and see what sticks. Without llms, you need to spend more
20.
by sdevonoes 2mo ago
Everyone can write; that doesn’t mean everyone can produce an interesting novel. If everyone can produce software via llms, that doesn’t necessarily mean that software is useful or interesting.
21.
by sdevonoes 2mo ago
Compilers also write code (they write machine code based on high level langs)… yet nobody asked the same question about them (or did they?) AI needs to be instructed and then some kind of verification of the output is needed. Programmers do
22.
by sdevonoes 2mo ago
So, if engineers out there are not even interested in the most immediate layer of code in front of their eyes (e.g., the code that is now written by LLMs), I guess more and more the kind of stuff like the one in the article is becoming like
23.
by sdevonoes 2mo ago
As someone who has never visited China or the US; yes. Why? Media. School shootings, ICE, crazy president… What do I see from China? Impressive multi-million cities… and true to be told, not much. China had a worse reputation, but not anymo
24.
by sdevonoes 2mo ago
Would that single person handle different topics such as: UI/UX, security, backups, distributed systems, data migrations, infrastructure, …? Sure thing there are engineers out there that know some about all of the above (I personally d
25.
by sdevonoes 2mo ago
But searching on google or SO wasn’t the bottleneck either. It was searching on your own codebase (and dependant ones) for the exact place (a class, a file, a function) where to put/delete/update business logic without breaking pr
26.
by sdevonoes 2mo ago
Got it. But then why Nike/Adidas/Quicksilver/etc cannot bring back clothes from the 90s? Buying second hand is not that nice (smells that never go away) and “vintage” places sell min. catalogue buy way overpriced.
27.
by sdevonoes 2mo ago
Another reason why LLMs suck. So far cons > pros
28.
by sdevonoes 2mo ago
Im curious, since I don’t drink coffee nor take protein supplements and the like, my question is: is the plan you keep taking what you take, let’s say, “forever”? Because the moment you stop taking, wouldn’t you notice a big drop?
29.
by sdevonoes 2mo ago
One could say it’s a way of “trust, but verify “
30.
by sdevonoes 2mo ago
I remember buying a Nike Tshirt in the early 2000s: good quality, and still looking decent today. Nowadays most of the Nike/Adidas/etc stuff is very low quality fabric and not necessarily cheap (at least in Western Europe)

More ›