Writing robust, bug free, efficient, maintainable, and readable code has never been easy and still isn’t. It’s an extremely difficult skill.
Are we seriously pretending that it was always easy now that an LLM can spit out some mediocre code? This seems to me a coping mechanism in response to the industry shifting.
The truth is we’re just realizing nobody, even the SWE’s, care about the code much as long as an LLM can grind it out for free.
There’s going to be a lot more of this coping as more and more human thinking gets automated. I can hear it now: “gathering business requirements was always the easy part”.
> Are we seriously pretending that it was always easy now that an LLM can spit out some mediocre code? This seems to me a coping mechanism in response to the industry shifting.
I also add that the skills required to write robust, bug free, efficient, maintainable, and readable code are also the same skills required to make LLMs generate code with those traits. Mediocre developers struggle to write mediocre code, but can easily prompt a LLM to output mediocre code. The output is always mediocre, both in the short run and moreso in the long run.
1) he literally wrote a blog post complaining that London sucks because there are too many non-white people there. We're not talking about someone who is a bit conservative; we're talking about an explicitly racist person.
I don’t think natural language is efficient enough. Whether that be text or voice.
I imagine the Star Trek vision is pretty accurate. You occasionally talk to the computer when it makes sense, but more often than not you’re still interacting with a GUI of some kind.
The law has yet to catch up to the idea of vibe coded software. I see significant problems.
Example: the other day someone was promoting their saas. They proudly advertised that they knew nothing about technology, and that AI created everything.
Yet their saas had a detailed privacy policy describing how your data was used. Of course the problem is, they have no way of knowing that their privacy policy is at all accurate. After all they don’t even know how to read their product’s code.
This undoubtedly exposes them to legal issues. I can imagine software being more tightly regulated as this spirals out of control.
We’ll hit a point soon where there’s so much dangerous and untrustworthy AI slop software on the market, that people will actively seek out and pay a premium for software created by professionals at reputable companies.
It’s also called Major depressive disorder. It’s basically depression that isn’t a temporary response to something. It’s long lasting depression that doesn’t go away.
You can easily look up the diagnostic criteria online.
Sure. From the employers perspective, I get the appeal of references.
As a candidate I find them to be a huge overstep and will almost never provide them.
No, I’m sorry. I’m not going to pester my friends and colleagues to “hop on a quick call” or fill out a 2 page survey every time I interview somewhere.
Quite frankly, I really don’t need or want my friends to be intimately involved in my job search.
This poor guy had to have all his references book a call, only for them to all be notified shortly after that they weren’t needed any more, because he flunked the interview.
> Sure. From the employers perspective, I get the appeal of references.
Respectfully, it doesn't seem like you do. References in many cases are actually needed for compliance purposes. An example for Anthropic is if the employee might be exposed to medical data, then reference checks can be used as part of a larger validation of employee identity to satisfy HIPAA requirements.
Amazon and others have the importance of reference checks baked into their agreements for those who work with them.
It's the exact same checks. I know this because I've had to fill out some of these compliance documents and implement similar sorts of procedures with the legal dept. In addition to background checks, candidate reference calls prior to onboarding are becoming a checkbox that must be ticked by various external groups.
And to clarify, it's not something I support or that I find it makes a lot of sense to me -- it's just an unfortunate situation of where things are currently at.
You run legal compliance on everyone interviewing for a job? What a waste of everyone’s time. Very inefficient and expensive. Do it after an offer is extended.
reply