It won't be a student on $10 replacing him. Who would hire an inexperienced student when there are piles of displaced experienced devs looking for work? One of them and a couple of AI licences could try to replace several people the way things are going.
At least until the investment capital starts to be called in and use of decent AI models becomes noticeable more expensive, assuming that happens long before open free models are good enough to replace them.
Of course that will lead to there being very few experienced people in a couple of decades, as most of the remaining ones age out, but I'll be long done by the time that becomes a big problem, I'm not on the right side of the mid-life divide!
> It won't be a student in $10 replacing him. Who would hire an inexperienced student when there are piles of displaced experienced devs looking for work?
Yeah it won't be a student making $10 an hour replacing him, it will be an experienced dev making $10 an hour because hey at least that beats starving to death.
The next step after "juniors are doomed, but seniors still get work" is pretty obviously that senior salaries are going to start rapidly dropping.
not sure where this meme of 'ai will become very expensive any time now!' comes from
consumer subscriptions are subsidized but the companies make very healthy margins via api pricing, which is what enterprises use, and cost per intelligence is dropping rapidly
That can't go on forever, which is why the big AI companies are crying for regulation to slow things down - they need to make some of that money back before others come along and start eating what little moat they have.
That, and a lot of that investment money seems to be moving in a rather circular fashion, which usually means that when things change it will happen quickly as there is effectively one pot that will all dry up at the same time.
valuations and funding look at *growth*, not money out and money in
ai has produced some of the fastest growing companies of All Time and plotting the trend leads to very profitable businesses in the future (which is the whole point of investing)
i think it would be a more nuanced and interesting conversation to talk about 1) how growth will change and 2) how the rapidly falling cost of intelligence will affect the different players in the ecosystem
(not a bullpost for the labs, i think their situation is precarious)
I am coming to the conclusion that the number of people on HN who understand actual business is a rounding error. I have made similar comments as yours and I get downvoted so fast that I'm literally blocked from responding not only on the post I got downvoted on but the entire of HN. Saying anything remotely that supports the idea that AI businesses are a massive opportunity is highly unpopular here. Also, HN post throttling algorithms will actively block you from continuing to engage (due to downvoting and other signals the throttling algorithms take into account), so I think that side of the sentiment is massively suppressed on this site increasing the echo chamber.
The overall perception I see most popular on HN of "AI" is that it's a waste of money, natural resources and we should be "doing something else".
I'm old enough where I've personally seen multiple AI winters and also been through major disruptions - the PC era, the consumer internet era, the cloud, social media, gig economy and now "AI".
For every major disruption, the biggest naysayers have been the very groups that got disrupted. They eventually had to either retire or find something else to do.
There's no logical explanation or data you can provide to these naysayers that will change their mind. They have dug their teeth into a narrative disconnected from actual evidence and that's now their identity.
As a result, I have a strong hypothesis that AI will forever redefine what knowledge work - including software - looks like and entails. Credentialism and rentseeking by educational institutions will be a thing of the past. Human experts will be largely employed by frontier and specialized AI agent companies and labs.
I have been extremely lucky to have invested early in Cisco, Google, Amazon, Dell, Uber and NVIDIA - wasn't very sure when I made those investments so much so that I invested only funds I could afford to loose.
I'm now fully leveraging my investments into AI. IF AI goes to h*ll, the consumer, retail, commodities, energy markets are so strongly coupled to it, that I doubt anyone will come out of it for less than a 20% correction, and I will be way past 100 when it does recover, so I have nothing to lose.
open weight models from China are there now, produced using an entirely different economic model, so whatever happens to openai or anthropic doesn't have that big of an impact on "will I have an agent to code with".
Why does everyone keep framing this as if this is a decision this person is making?
This is what is happening to the industry. It's a fact of life. A new technology has disrupted the method through which software is created. There's no going back and there's no pretending we can continue not using it.
You either adopt the tools now and have trouble finding a job later or have trouble finding a job now.
> next time op comes up for air is when he finds out their employer replaced them with a college student making $10/hour.
I mean numerous firms seem to already be doing this, and they're making HN's front page regularly for week-long downtimes, blog posts tearing them apart for shockingly shit engineering practices, and their userbase in open rebellion from the sheer STATE of the product.
My employer has absolutely no interest in cutting any engineering staff in favor of AI. But we're also not a VC-funded human misery mill, and we have a sustainable business model involving selling actual products, so these facts may be related to that.
> blog posts tearing them apart for shockingly shit engineering practices, and their userbase in open rebellion from the sheer STATE of the product
So far I've seen relatively little anger of that level, except perhaps aimed at MS for the state of Windows. And unfortunately for the humans most companies high on AI juice are more likely to follow the path of finding better ways to use AI (or switching to what they think is a better model) rather than re-engaging with the meat workers, is such a user revolt seems imminent.
My DayJob is riding high on AI AMT, though quality is not currently falling (in fact by some metrics there is an improvement) because people are properly reviewing everything that comes out of it. I'm still planning on not touching the stuff though, if it comes to a choice of “AI or be redundant”, I'll be redundant, but even the Luddite that I am can see there is a benefit if it is used well.
Wow, what an insightful comment, paired with a downvote. I am in awe.
Nevermind that the calculation of their retirement number was what I was suggesting in the first place.
It's amazing to me that even HN is full of this kind of petty jealousy, where people are ostensibly amiable to founding their own businesses and owning their time. God forbid someone retire. I expect to get downvoted on Reddit for even daring to mention I can afford bread, but I didn't expect that kind of thing here.
Maybe you should choose a different sin, you know Envy is the only one you can't have any fun at, right?
from a programmer/technical perspective, very cool and technically impressive. gonna have to try this myself with opus 5.5
from a consumer perspective, I don't think I fully know why yet, but I just don't have a desire to play any of these AI generated games. I'm curious what other people here think (even if we're all little bias here due to our technical curiosity - very curious what you think)? like, I generally feel that because the technical execution for something like is diminishing to zero, the half of me that likes to play and look out for new games doesn't really see why this is special or interesting? I too have ideas and can put a couple hundred dollars into opus 5.5 and get it to make an entire game. once this all becomes normalized and everything from games, to books, to movies, tv shows, etc become something that can just be generated at a good enough quality that I wouldn't know the difference between a person and machine, I guess what is the point of any of this? I feel like knowing that a machine made this instantly reminds me that literally nothing about this matters. a lot of the joy behind getting into something like a game or book was to be able to celebrate someone’s hard work and to be apart of a community and or talk to like minded people about someone’s works.
and I want to be clear, none of this is criticism towards the demo here - the demo is cool. I'm just also curious what people think the 2nd/3rd/4th order effects will be when making anything becomes so normal, that it's just another part of your day-to-day? I guess, I'm kind of searching for an answer to the question of why should I really care about this if it's all a zero sum game and a race to the bottom?
i think the main thing is intent, an llm does not have it, only the human behind it. we all hate slop where the human put no effort into the project, mainly because there is no real intent there. but i don't see an issue with a game where the developer used an llm to build it, but put in the effort to make sure the game plays well, has good mechanics, is fun, etc. that's the part that humans are good at anyways, we are comparatively bad at typing code which to me isn't very interesting anyways.
It’s about the stock market crash of 1929, and done in way that leaves no stone unturned. the book could be thought of as an obsessive pursuit of financial journalism in order to truly understand every domino that fell and lead to the crash - and not just the high level story.
I’m only about a quarter of the way through, but it’s a great read!
I was apart of the "covid chess cohort" and got really into it for quite a few years. In that time, I also learned about what the chess culture was like pre-engine and post-engine, and I think you could argue that post-engine did kind of make the game more mechanical - and that kinda ruined things for people that grew up in the pre-engine era. it felt like pre-engine chess had a lot of mystique to it because knowing the best move was never truly clear. the only way to know what was best, was by: getting better yourself, socializing at chess club, learning from better players or coach.
this sort of lack of clarity is what drove people to learn more about the game.
like think about what it must've been like to go to a chess tournaments pre-engines: finals matches had everyone at your chess club watching the game, calculating lines with each other, and you HAD to calculate to understand the direction of game. it sounds so much more engaging and fun!
now, the top games have the stockfish bar next to it, and you instantly know who's got better odds without having to really follow along. and you're not encouraged to calculate beyond a few moves ahead because you just offload the real thinking to stockfish. honestly, it's a vibe a killer when you go back and see images and read about the culture beforehand.
I agree engines didn't really "kill" chess - and I think most of that is due to chess not being tied to economic value. but it did kill what I believe was a superior culture compared to today's chess era.
all this to say, I think what AI did to chess culture in the 90s is happening to stem right now with LLMs
>> I was apart of the "covid chess cohort" and got really into it for quite a few years. In that time, I also learned about what the chess culture was like pre-engine and post-engine, and I think you could argue that post-engine did kind of make the game more mechanical - and that kinda ruined things for people that grew up in the pre-engine era. it felt like pre-engine chess had a lot of mystique to it because knowing the best move was never truly clear. the only way to know what was best, was by: getting better yourself, socializing at chess club, learning from better players or coach.
I need to be very precise here, but it is not right to say that we know what the best move is in any chess board position. What we know is what move a chess engine would make that would win the game against a human, or sometimes another chess engine. We know a winning move; not the best move.
Winning in chess is not the same as knowing what the best move is. Having chess engines that can beat any human in chess is not the same as knowing how every possible game will develop. The latter is known as "solving chess" and we don't yet have that. We have fully solved games like tic-tac-toe, backgammon and checkers, so that there exist databases of every possible path through those games but this is not done for chess, and there is no hint that it is even possible to do given that chess is such a combinatorially more complex game than those.
More to the point, the upshot of the fact that we now have super-human chess engines that can beat any human in chess (and Go and shoggi) is that there is no longer the will to research the bigger question about solving chess. The solution of the minor problem, how to beat humans in chess, has sidelined and displaced research in the major problem, how to solve chess, and we will now never find the solution to the latter.
And if that reminds you of something, well, yes, exactly.
I actually think this type of suggestion/thinking is not good for the game. the mystique of dwarf fortress is that it's a game that plays in your imagination, not on the screen. the point of the ascii visuals is to give a player enough context to understand the state of the world, but it's intentionally obtuse so fun arrises from your brain having to color in all the details. any suggestion that tries to add more polish to the graphics brings you farther away from where the fun lives
Going to have to agree to disagree here. Graphical polish would make it much more enjoyable for me, and I spent enough time with the ascii version back in the day to get used to it.
it's a bit unfair to say this is the only thing that can happen. we can just as easily assume in like over a few years, US leadership identifies that AI is an arms race, and continuing down this path leads is going to lead to a zero-sum-game. and so instead of just mindlessly pushing the cart forever, we see government intervention
I used to have this feeling, and I just got over this hurdle. I now continue coding by hand with zero AI usage. It's amazing how much better you feel when you get to use your brain. What really helped me was many perspective shifts
perspective shift 1: the people that never cared about programming/engineering finally left the room. the people chasing the trends, trying to grift, or just after money are finally gone. we can finally be in a room and just talk about good engineering. the people we as engineers never wanted to hear from are off attempting to force the world to use a tool that everyone 40 and under passionately rejects (this is spicy for HN terms, but the avg joe hates AI. people aren't stupid - they know they only stand to lose from it in the longer term).
perspective shift 2: I just read Zen, and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. It taught me a lot. I came away from that book understanding what "quality" means at a very philosophical level, and it gave me a lot of confidence for some fuzzy thoughts I already felt. it's too abstract to explain here, but it does a good job of explaining that there is perceived and strong difference between caring something into existence, verses just generating something into existence. this book breaks down how quality is not some artifact that lives in what you're making, and or is some feeling you get when you look at something that is aesthetically pleasing - quality is an event that occurs before you mind has differentiated yourself from the thing subject/object you're admiring - and in that moment, quality arises from the care you give it. there must exists energy and care towards what you're doing for quality to arise. generating anything with AI will never bring that fruition.
many people try to counter this stance by saying that they iterate with AI forever, and assume that iteration is a the same as the caring event described in ZATAOMM - but the difference is that grading output is not the same as creating/authorship. it's must a read and deep study I think if you're into programming and this mental state
perspective shift 3: This talk from Brandon Sanderson called We are the Art [1]. I personally do a lot of creative coding - like games and such. this talk does a great job of breaking down how art and creation ultimately lives in the person. I won't summarize here, just a must a watch
perspective shift 4: I got off all the mainstream social media site bc the PR machine for AI is relentless. of course you're going to feel like crap when every site says, future generations will be homeless, K shaped economy, permanent underclass, etc. you gotta log off these sites to create some distance with the beast - it's not you, the world really is just messed up rn. Also I barely browse HN anymore. this place is the public square for VCs and people who lost hte plot with technology - I just happened to be here, and wanted to help my fellow programmer grinding through the same mental trenches I was in
perspective shift 5: go find some programming communities on discord. I'm in a discord with like 5000 active members that really care about coding, and doing so without AI. this is a very active discord. once you realize there is a strong community still building like this, it really showed me we're not low in numbers, and there still a large group of people that will celebrate engineering efforts done by hand. and there are still people that need to understand these machines at a very deep level - you're efforts aren't wasted
perspective shift 6: look at AI on the job as a way to get your work done faster to get home to do real programming. work code can be trash, home is where the real work is done. The analogy I’ve been telling myself is that it’s like going into a gold mine - no one wants to be in the mine, but i do like leaving with gold. i gotta pay the bills, but i don’t need to love it.
perspective shift 7: The overall environment we live is just depressing and is reminiscent to Fahrenheit 451. I came away feeling closer to the author and protagonist than my first read. specifically the kind of hubris/ignorance found in all the side characters of F451 mimics what it feels like to talk with ai optimists. also, the way F451 is a world filled with people that are actively disengaged and comfortable being passively entertained feels almost too real. this book draws a lot of parallels with modern times, and it's a nice book to remind you that other people have felt this way in times of large technological change - and you're not crazy to feel depressed.
Go start working on that side project you use to be really passionate about. me and all the other serious engineers are excited to see it
Thanks for this. Another perspective shift: do real things in the real world. Read physical books, make art with your own two hands, garden, go for a walk. I’m going to re-learn cursive handwriting. No real reason other than my handwriting is bad and I want to incorporate more writing into my life. The recent post here about Neal Stephenson was an inspiration.
Hey I just wanted to say thanks for writing this. I’m going to check out the things you mentioned, and it just feels nice to know there are like minded people out there. You writing this has helped me feel better about the state of things, and I appreciate that.
> quality is an event that occurs before you mind has differentiated yourself from the thing subject/object you're admiring - and in that moment, quality arises from the care you give it. there must exists energy and care towards what you're doing for quality to arise. generating anything with AI will never bring that fruition.
This sounds very closely related to "ownership", something we've been trying to get rid of through agile/scrum and "bus factor" talk for over a decade.
Once you know them for who/what they are, and you learn to be comfortable enough with not following them closely, or not knowing what the hip thing is right now, then you can learn to let go of that (almost) insatiable need to keep up. Let them have the room - and the mental energy it requires.
No 4: getting off social media and HN is a good thing in general and in particular. There really is a distortion field around these sites that can make you feel sick.
A recent thing that caused a perspective shift for me was identifying where my drive was coming from. Triggered by the difference between the etymologies of amateur (one who loves) vs connoisseur (one who knows).
Amateur - learns construction on free time ad hoc/by doing, builds a cabin, enjoys living in it
Connoisseur - reads lots of books on construction, might build a cabin to verify competence, enjoys thinking about it
Professional - went to school and works in construction, enjoys the paycheck, doesn't have a cabin
I haven't read the motorcycle zen book yet, but I imagine that is the loving amateur angle, whereas for me I just thrive in knowledge. Translating that to the current AI hellscape, I kinda like that the code crafting bit is a bit less pronounced where I can instead focus on getting to know the system/model/domain of my work. It helps with the dystopian feelings I sometimes get from being in the mine. But if you are a passionate coder, I would imagine that letting someone else build your cabin would be extremely provoking.
I don't think the majority of ppl are giving it hate tbh - I think it's just a HN thing. everyone I know that is into gaming is excited about it. I would chalk it up to consumer misunderstanding around the pricing, but I actually think most consumers that are interested in buying a steam HW product are fully in the know why there's a chip shortage. I am in the group that is waiting for the price to drop, but I am excited to get mine!
big fan of oxide, and love the demo overall, but at the same time, I can't shake the feeling that these kinds of 3D demos are a bit gimmicky/cheap nowadays. pages like this used to be a signal for a high-end product and or a benchmark for good engineering. now though, we all know that this kind of work can be vibe-coded with threejs fairly quickly if you have the assets. idk ... it feels like it's trying to capture my attention through flashing lights instead of letting the work stand on its own
I don't want to subtract from the demo too much, b/c I do love oxide, but I do see this as a trend that more people will use to garner attention until it's too overdone - at which point, 3D will revert to being used for more practical use-cases
IIRC the CAD exports were in the many millions of polygons, so there's substantial work in preparing the assets for the explorer. Kenan (the 3d artist I worked with) did fantastic work cleaning and optimising them. I'm somewhat jealous of hardware startups with products without quite so many parts!
It's part of the reason I'd waited so long before making this, I knew it was going to be a lot of work. There's parts that Claude was especially useful for, like perf testing, debugging and animation. But the first half of the project was done almost entirely by hand.
I appreciate ya commenting, and let me tell ya directly that the work is great! I'm an old-head and curmudgeon - my thoughts here are about the world at large. your work here is great, please keep it up!
I have complex feelings about it all too. My hope is we'll re-consider what's considered hard. As a designer who started his career after the advent of digital typesetting, some of the things I barely think about were once considered difficult.
My feeling? I ask myself the same question as I do for for everything nowadays. Yeah this might be ai slop, but is it good ai slop? If it's good, like this, I feel good. If it's bad, I feel bad.
Human effort as a proxy for quality... that ship has sailed. And that makes me feel frustrated.
yeah, I agree with you. I guess the part that feels disingenuous is that these kinds of projects are some-what cashing in on attention from people who still who see threejs slop as "high-effort UIs." this speaks more about me than other ppl, I'm just personally already at the point where all of this feels closer to slop rather than quality. I guess as this trend plays out, we'll all eventually feel somewhat similar on the yet-another-3d-UI-slop trend
I’m so happy I quit tech a year ago. this guy is driving straight off a cliff and doesn’t even seem to realize.
curious, is this the default culture at tech companies now?