the difference is that code is not something the average person will marvel at over the intricate hand built details. You might get a few nerds interested if it's something super novel (like rewriting a major modern web app without any 3rd party libraries that is 30x more performant), but most people dont care. Extra true for businesses, I can't think of a business other than maybe a mom&pop shop or a place where showing wealth is important where they wouldnt happily issue casio watches far before they would consider a rolex.
Regular businesses are not going to build their own slop software because of AI, this is delusional. People will be hired because they love to build. Only a small percentage of the world loves to build things.
The most passionate people with the best reputation will suceed, they will continue to be in the most demand and will be the most valuable, like a swiss watchmaker.
Sorry LLMs arent replacing anyone who's got strong skills and cultivates them. You're so wrong here. These more passionate builders will however replace the lazy people who offload all their skill and brain capability to llms, and they'll use AI to help them.
Being lazy and letting llms do everything for you is not a good strategy.
i so desperately wish we were still in the days of manufacturers making their own OS. It's why I moved to iphone: when the hardware company makes the software and vice-versa the integration is much better and less error-prone/bloated. It never made sense to me for android to be shoehorned into thousands of devices, instead of a fork being made and for thorough OS rework to happen to support the device.
That is definitely not how I remember the feature phone era. The OS was an afterthought seemingly whipped together a couple months before the device hit the shelves and nothing was ever consistent even across recent models from the same manufacturer.
Back then the primary goal was checkboxes for the carrier to advertise and UI/UX was a distant second priority at most. Sometimes an advertised feature would just flat out be unusable (such as MP3 players), but good luck waiting for any kind of update because by then those developers had already been reassigned to the next handset model they promised to carriers.
Also, Samsung extensively customizes their OneUI fork of Android, with its own UI look and feel that evolves independently from Android based on their own priorities. Plus Samsung's Android maintains hundreds of features that either don't exist at all on AOSP/Pixels or later get folded into mainline Android.
(Including the little known killer app suite "Good Lock" available on Samsung's Galaxy store which gives power users an almost obscene amount of additional niche options and customizations that would give UX minimalist designers at Google or Apple a heart attack)
But despite how different Pixel vs. OneUI look and feel, I can use the exact same apps whether on a Pixel or Galaxy or $100 trash phone. Interoperability is very easy to take for granted and Android app ecosystem is (still) paradise compared to the lowest common denominator J2ME "app" era of the 2000s.
the moment i see the AI slop writing I stop reading a github repo. Particularly when i know it was just a cobbled together project of others works by AI. Someone put a LOT of man hours into the core project (the brain mapping), the least you could do is put in some effort into this project using their work.
You are right about it (you can easily see that it is how claude writes), I didn't claim otherwise too.
Moreover I want it to be used as a base for other people who would use AI (which would be most of the people) to work upon it from here.
most of their innovations are in stuff that would be boring to go into detail with. They talked about the advancements in their A series processors (but you left that out), they talk about their complex layering to prevent a crease from forming, they talk about the dynamic audio. Love em or hate em but you cant say they arent doing new things.
Any file format or data structure you can display on the screen is processed. The whole point is the debate around phone processing is not as clear cut as photos being processed vs unprocessed.
The layperson also doesn't really consider the result of their smartphone app to be "processed", until they get slapped in the face with it. The layperson's intuition isn't reliable.
The layperson doesn’t have any idea what they are talking about so it’s hard to pull a coherent statement out of it.
People claim they want unprocessed photos but it’s not clear what they even mean by that. I think we can rule things like ai replacing the sun with a moon as obviously too far, but most phones like the iPhone aren’t AI generating or filtering things.
Someone manually selecting an exposure, white balance, and tint in Lightroom isn’t any less real than letting the camera do that automatically because the camera doesn’t know which values are real either.
I'm not the person you are replying to, but the readme is very clearly written by an AI, and it sounds nothing like his older work. Sometimes it's just super clear to people something is written with AI without you getting some sort of singular "gotcha" word or indicator. It's just writing patterns that would be hard to clearly establish rules for here in an HN comment, but it's incredibly obvious when you learn to spot it.
How do you know when it's not written by LLM except to take someone's word? If I got caught slopping I'd be too embarassed to admit it. "I wrote it all myself! I actually majored in slick writing and minored in tenuous metaphor."
This entire subsection of the discussion is about the apparent fact that some people just can't tell whether they're reading AI slop or what. And this surely applies to the haters just as much as the lovers.
Anyway, I've no doubt your blog posts from 2009 or whatever were not generated by an LLM. But this fuckin shit right here from 2026 though? LLM. 100%.
(By which I don't mean it generated 100% of it, as there's the odd sentence that sounds vaguely human, just that I am 100% certain that the LLM was allowed to far more than merely breathe on this writing. And that's enough to get me complaining, because it makes it a real headache to read.)
Be grateful. I couldn't spot AI writing for a while, and I was suddenly enjoying reading clear and punchy text about all kinds of topics that people hadn't been talking much about.
Then at some point it "clicked" and I was suddenly unable to not see it. Articles that I had thought sophisticated now came across to me as if they were written in crayon.
Enjoy it while you still can!
(And yes, the article here is very clearly AI written. Great content, written in crayon.)
if you were around long enough, you would know that:
A) thats not a rule
B) that was added to the guidelines because people were complaining about article choices.
If you pay a researcher to do gain of function research on dangerous viruses, and that research end up causing a global pandemic, you are absolutely to blame.
that is not correct in the slightest. It would only be your blame if you built and managed the lab. The lab is not US owned or managed, it's up to the lab who claims they can safely work on dangerous viruses to ensure that they keep it contained. They still own and manage and are responsible for the lab, the US just paid them for research. It's no different than the US contracting space onboard SpaceX rockets, the US isn't then suddenly responsible if the rocket misdirects and hits someone's house.
This has gotta be a troll man. They aren't responsible for poor security measures. They are only responsible for what is outlined in the thing they pay for. I'm gonna mute this thread purely because I'm pretty certain you're trolling for the sake of it. If for some reason you aren't trolling, take a business ethics and responsibilities course, there's some free ones online, or you could talk to a lawyer you might know, either one should help you understand.
> Modern UX is bad because many front-end programmers fundamentally just do not care about the UX, it's not about the specific tech they use.
This is untrue and is weird misunderstanding on your part. Most of modern UX and UI is designed to fit the needs of the customer for the frontend team/dev: the product or marketing or sales department. The user of the website is very rarely the customer for the dev.
The experts in the sciences usually back their claims up using citations, and can be disproven through the normal methods of disproving citations. not through "vibes"
reply