Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | greenchair's commentslogin

Speaking of overinclusion, 'wild' is my nominee for 2026 as I'm seeing it all over the place.

> 'wild' is my nominee for 2026

I don't know how to define the delineation I'm about to propose. But there is a difference between overinclusivity trashing a morally-loaded, potentially even technical, term, and slang evolving.


AI assisted coding makes you dumber full stop. It's obvious as soon as you try it for the first time. Need a regex? No need to engage your brain. AI will do that for you. Is what it produced correct? Well who knows? I didn't actually think about it. As current gen seniors brains atrophy over the next few years the scarier thing is that juniors won't even be learning the fundamentals because it is too easy to let AI handle it.

Strongly disagree. If the complexity of your work it the software development itself, then it means that your work is not very complex to begin with.

It has always been extremely annoying to fight with people who mistake the ability of building or engaging with complicated systems (like your regex) with competency.

I work in building AI for a very complex application, and I used to be in the top 0.1% of Python programmers (by one metric) at my previous FAANG job, and Claude has completely removed any barriers I have between thinking and achieving. I have achieved internal SOTA for my company, alone, in 1 week, doing something that previously would have taken me months of work. Did I have to check that the AI did everything correctly? Sure. But I did that after saving months of implementation time so it was very worth it.

We're now in the age of being ideas-bound instead of implementation-bound.


What was the metric?

Trivia was always the hallmark of an insufferable programmer. Remembering the syntax to regex always struck me as a detail of programming, not a fundamental. I'm glad I no longer have to waste my life debugging it.

>> AI assisted coding makes you dumber full stop. It's obvious as soon as you try it for the first time. Need a regex? No need to engage your brain. AI will do that for you.

Regex is the worst possible example you could have given. Seriously, how many people do you know who painstakingly hand-craft their own regexes as opposed to using one of the million tools out there that can work backwards from example inputs and outputs to generate a regex that satisfies the conditions?


I agree. In the beginning when I was starting, I let the AI do all of the work and merely verified that it does what I want, but then I started running into token limits. In the first two weeks I honestly was just looking forward for the limit to refresh. The low effort made it feel like I would be wasting my time writing code without the agent.

Starting with week three the overall structure of the code base is done, but the actual implementation is lacking. Whenever I run out of tokens I just started programming by hand again. As you keep doing this, the code base becomes ever more familiar to you until you're at a point where you tear down the AI scaffolding in the places where it is lacking and keep it where it makes no difference.


good observation comrade!

nearly spit out my coffee, thank you!

streissand effect in action, surprised this thread was allowed to live.

I know it is hard to see the bias when you are in the bubble along with them.

Great, show me something they consistently misrepresent.

I agree that everyone has, by definition, some bias, but NPR/PBS tend to avoid editorialization significantly more than their counterparts.


PBS brings on Brooks Capehart to discuss politics. Having two partisan players from opposite sides of spectrum is a good way to get some balance. The fact that they agree so often on the fundamentals tells me the US is cooked.

Ahem, their reporting on nuclear power was often non-scientific and just plain wrong. In fact anything having to do with the environment was generally pretty poor from a factual and scientific basis. Their reporting on politics was consistently rated as one of the most extreme in the US media.

I do wish they could do a 'just the facts' reporting as I think that is worth some taxpayer money to support. But by any measure, from any media watchdog, they were one of the most extreme and least accurate media source. That you can't see that says a lot more about you than PBS/NPR. Hell, there are 20 year old SNL skits mocking their coverage for its very narrow POV.


Why the sudden pivot to agents and subagents? One shotting not good enough? Was a tech plateau reached? Or maybe one related to cost?

Yes I dont get it either. probably bots, paid posts.

yep google ai results are old too.

that argument also misses because it is based on old best practices which are no longer relevant.

Certificate pinning can be useful, especially in particularly sensitive areas. But I wouldn't expect it as a standard security practice. If anything I appreciate that it isn't done so that reverse engineers can thoroughly study the traffic on their own devices. I agree that it was odd that the article mentioned it more than a quick note, let along made a big deal out of it.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: