I do web development, it makes no sense for me to use a browser most of the public doesn't use. Also I have a ton of extensions that help with development. Firefox is painful.
Every time someone complains about firefox it's something trivial like this... "I don't like the default download location." / "I don't like how the dev tools opens on the bottom." / "I don't like the way the tab bar looks." Absolutely wild to me that using a browser without an adblocker, forever, is better than spending a week or whatever getting used to the different dev tools.
This is exactly how I feel. I knew it already to an extent from my time in college, but so many people come into this industry because they want to be able to produce the end product, or just have a stable job that makes good money. Neither of those are bad reasons to get into this profession, but it does make me sad how few peers I have who do programming because they're passionate about the act of programming. The problem solving, the dance of using programming languages to communicate efficiently and robustly to both machines and humans... I'm very sad how enthusiastically so many of my peers just toss that away.
Aside from many of these things just being a layer difference - it’s not unreasonable to want to work on databases query optimisation an not enjoy css or enjoy building frontends but just want a db that’s fast and works. The flip of your view is that they may find it sad that you don’t want to make things, you just want to solve puzzles.
> Aside from many of these things just being a layer difference - it’s not unreasonable to want to work on databases query optimisation an not enjoy css or enjoy building frontends but just want a db that’s fast and works.
I don't mean that it's unsetting that people enjoy different parts of the job, I enjoy many of those same aspects, but it's sad to me how few people around me care about the aspect that I originally fell in love with, which was the bedrock of our profession. Specifically, the work of solving problems with the machine/human shared language of code, instead of just writing out plain-english specs of what you want to have happen.
> The flip of your view is that they may find it sad that you don’t want to make things, you just want to solve puzzles.
So what? Their "just get it done" POV is far more common in this industry than mine (apparently), and the enjoyment they get from their job isn't being actively optimized away.
I don't know if it's "hate" rather than "a means to an ends". I love learning new languages, and coding. But it was always a means to an ends. The dopamine hit always came from seeing the project compile and do something.
There are multiple ends in conflict. Code skillfully constructed using abstractions that fit well to the problem space can be extended, maintained, and refactored as necessary to serve customers and markets from high to low level over long periods of time with all the social and industrial change that comes with that. Simply putting in place mechanisms that deliver what is needed now end up unintentionally cutting off future variants, alternative uses, longevity, and robustness all to minimize perceived costs.
And it isn't so much that one approach may be better than another. That is going to depend on context and available resources and more. What we are seeing is the short term being served to the absolute exclusion of thought about the longer term. Maybe if that goes fast and well enough then it will be sufficient, but churning out code bases that endure is a challenge that is only starting to be tested.
Yeah and especially the satisfaction that you were able to make a user delighted to use your thing. Fixing bugs, making things faster, adding new features, for me personally I do it because I feels really good when a customer loves to use the thing I've built.
Weather I've done the manual coding work myself or have prompted an LLM to cause these things to happen, I still chose what to work on and if it was worthy of the users' time.
I realised that early on when I stopped coding as much in my free time. After work I wanted to do practically anything else. But quite a few people at work continued to spend all of their free time coding, and clearly enjoyed the process. The SerenityOS/Ladybird creator spent years coding an arguably pointless project purely for the enjoyment of it.
Whereas I always liked to design and build a useful result. If it isn't useful I have no motivation to code it. Looking up APIs, designing abstractions, fixing compiler errors is just busywork that gets in the way.
I loved programming when I was 8 years old. 30+ years later the novelty is gone.
I think a lot of us like solving novel problems. But the menial drudgery of most modern software, where you're writing code in an app that was written in a week 8 years ago and then had mountains of "get it done quickly and we can improve it later" over the years, wears on everyone. Much as the advent of decent cordless tools revolutionized "workman" trades, ai helps programmers
My impression is that it's mostly Western secular interpretation while the largest branch of Buddhism and the most predominant in Asia currently is Mahayana where Buddha, or rather Buddhas (as it has many others besides Siddhartha Gautama), are seen as omnipotent spiritual beings with supernatural powers, who are accessible through prayer after apparent death of their human form, which seems close to our traditional concept of deities.
I don't know if this list motivates anyone, it just makes me feel like I'm not worth being friends with and I will be forever alone, even though I do have friends.
I don't think the point is that you have to be all of those things, or even any of them. Just that imagining what kinds of things people you'd like do is a good way to know what might enrich you also. You shouldn't be discouraged if that seems far off, but all of it can be broken up into as many pieces as you like. If it all feels too much
That implies they think some people (apparently the ones who eat takeout or don't go to gym), are just not "good enough" to have friends. It's an esteem for others issue.
disagree. I've felt the same after reading the same but I believe op tries just to point out that when you're the best version of yourselves, by removing the common denominator of bad versions, you'll be noticed more and that presents an interesting way for people to present a chance themselves to hear/see you. From there you get to go and may be, may be you find yourselves with a good friend. More importantly,Ithe confidence you'll get out of this is immense and you'll feel peace spending time for yourselves instead of feeling bad about having all the time and don't have anyone to spend with.. I cant say this advice helped me 100% but atleast it helped reduce the biased stress you put on yourselves.
I'm all for trying to be the best version of yourself, but I think it's discouraging to tie it with the person's worth as a friend. Replying with "find interesting hobby" to the poster who explicitly wrote he finds it hard to find a hobby in particular reads like condemnation, as if until you don't lock in and check those boxes don't even try to socialize. Imagine you meet an interesting person, learn they don't really have any hobbies, and break off a friendship because of it - I'd find that psychopathic. Why should we foster this attitude towards ourselves?
True. I realise my reply reflected a little of " don't even try to socialize untill you've checked all these boxes and the best version" which is wrong.. I merely pointed out / defended the realism od the comment I replied to.
The definition is not and never should be the "hobbies". It's just something you find interesting which brings the parity to you and the other person. not necessarily a hobby and could be of anything.. Hobby is just a common way suggested to find people and then, only then, you get a change to know whether they are interesting.
It's not that not having hobbies makes you not worth befriending, it's that having hobbies is one thing that makes people more interesting, and makes it easier to make friends.
> hey chatgpt give me a snarky response to this comment that would wittily refute the argument, make it funny and interesting, concise and to the point
Ah yes, the “tiny little seed” defense — because if I hum three notes and Quincy Jones writes the symphony, clearly we co-composed it.
Sure, prompting involves taste and direction. So does ordering at a restaurant. But if I tell the chef “spicy, but make it fusion” and then Instagram the plate as my culinary creation, I’m not suddenly Gordon Ramsay.
Nobody’s saying there’s zero input. We’re saying input isn’t authorship. A seed isn’t a forest — and picking your favorite output isn’t the same as growing it.
It's exactly concerns like these that could drive people into loneliness and nihilism, when constant disappointment with a lack of care from society turns into hatred and despair.
Also doomerism, but I'd argue that a prominent figure that might fit this nihilism bill is / are Elon Musk and similar technocrats / futurists who strongly believe in Roko's Basilisk (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roko%27s_basilisk), that is, to paraphrase, "the world is doomed, AI will rise, become our God, and exterminate humankind, but we have to ensure it actually emerges so maybe they will be merciful to us". Which I believe (but I'm no philosopher) is both nihilistic, fatalistic and religious thinking.
To the point where I wouldn't be surprised if these people have or would kill people if they aren't in line with their agendas. They have the connections, power and money.
Is it the first time when workers directly work on their own replacement?
If so, software developer may go down in history as the dumbest profession ever.
but annoying hype is exactly the issue with AI in my eyes. I get it's a useful tool in moderation and all, but I also experience that management values speed and quantity of delivery above all else, and hype-driven as they are I fear they will run this industry to the ground and we as users and customers will have to deal with the world where software is permanently broken as a giant pile of unmaintainable vibe code and no experienced junior developers to boot.
>management values speed and quantity of delivery above all else
I don't know about you but this has been the case for my entire career.
Mgmt never gave a shit about beautiful code or tech debt or maintainability or how enlightened I felt writing code.
it's alive and well
reply