To put it bluntly: this particular product category is now an afternoon's vibe-coding project for one person. The result would be worse code, probably. Also probably still good enough.
The result would be worse code, probably. Also probably still good enough.
And that's because the definition of "good enough" is drifting towards "crappy", has been for decades, now accelerated by the AI.
Was thinking the other day how the bars of quality for software pre-Internet was so much higher just because any small software shop only ever had one shot: ship your software on floppy disks, with practically no chance to patch and fix bugs later. People either like your 1.0 or they don't and that's your whole business story.
Then came the Internet, bug fix updates became so much easier, and with it came crappification and bugs-as-a-norm attitude.
And that's because the definition of "good enough" is drifting towards "crappy", has been for decades, now accelerated by the AI.
Interestingly I have found the opposite in the software I write. LLMs make it so easy to get the basics in place that I spend the time on the details and polish.
Nothing so scientific. Im just having a lot of fun using the software I write with LLMs because I can easily add polish and build things I didnt have time for before.
Ah yes, just want I want, slopcoded dev tools by people who don’t understand what the fuck they’re doing and who will drop support the moment their agents hit some minor issue.
I expect the energy usage of a thousand people all running their own local models is significantly less efficient than those same people sharing a model hosted in a data center.
Comments
If I was maintaining such a boutique implementation I could probably do without AI as well, sans the moral high ground posting.
To put it bluntly: this particular product category is now an afternoon's vibe-coding project for one person. The result would be worse code, probably. Also probably still good enough.
And that's because the definition of "good enough" is drifting towards "crappy", has been for decades, now accelerated by the AI.
Was thinking the other day how the bars of quality for software pre-Internet was so much higher just because any small software shop only ever had one shot: ship your software on floppy disks, with practically no chance to patch and fix bugs later. People either like your 1.0 or they don't and that's your whole business story.
Then came the Internet, bug fix updates became so much easier, and with it came crappification and bugs-as-a-norm attitude.
And now this.
Not whining, just stating the facts.
Interestingly I have found the opposite in the software I write. LLMs make it so easy to get the basics in place that I spend the time on the details and polish.
Are you measuring the number of bugs per line of code in production, compared to pre-AI? That's the metric.
Nothing so scientific. Im just having a lot of fun using the software I write with LLMs because I can easily add polish and build things I didnt have time for before.
Ah yes, just want I want, slopcoded dev tools by people who don’t understand what the fuck they’re doing and who will drop support the moment their agents hit some minor issue.
Yeah. What do they want, a golden star next to their name?
This is the kind of posturing that leads nowhere. If you're concerned about resource usage then use an open model locally
Why would an open local model use less resources?
You don't usually cool local GPU's with community water and you don't need to cut down trees to create room for data-center.
I would love that local AI's, would be good enough for my coding demands, but so far It's not there yet for me.
I expect the energy usage of a thousand people all running their own local models is significantly less efficient than those same people sharing a model hosted in a data center.
My advice: let these people think what they want, it reduces competition in an already saturated market