People forget that good engineering isn't "the strongest bridge", but the cheapest bridge that just barely won't fail under conditions.
blast 7 minutes ago [-]
> the cheapest bridge that just barely won't fail
That can't be right? What about safety factors
StevenWaterman 4 minutes ago [-]
Safety factors exist because without them, bridges fall down
siriusastrebe 20 minutes ago [-]
What would happen if we made bridges to last as long as possible, to withstand natural disasters and require minimal maintenance?
What if we built things that are meant to last? Would the world be better for it?
recursive 15 minutes ago [-]
Devil's advocate here. Maybe we'd all forget how to build bridges in the next thousand years, after bridging all the bridg-able spans.
DeathArrow 5 minutes ago [-]
What if instead of one bridge we build three, so more people can cross the river?
RcouF1uZ4gsC 3 minutes ago [-]
The existence and ubiquity of bash scripts make me doubt this.
vb-8448 38 minutes ago [-]
Good code wasn't winning even before the ai slop era!
The pattern was always: ship fast, fix/document later, but when "later" comes "don't touch what is working".
To date nothing changed yet, I bet it won't change even in the future.
briantakita 25 minutes ago [-]
I was told by an exec...once a company or technology implements something and gets mindshare, the community (including companies) moves on.
Competition is essentially dead for that segment given there is always outward growth.
With that being said, AI enables smaller players to implement their visions with enough completeness to be viable. And with a hands off approach to code, the underlying technology mindshare does not matter as much.
esafak 7 minutes ago [-]
If that were true first-movers would always win. Hotmail came before Gmail. Yahoo came before Google. Myspace came before Facebook. Et cetera. Your exec mate sounds like he was dialing it in.
yshamrei 14 minutes ago [-]
good code do not earn money =)
seniorThrowaway 38 minutes ago [-]
this submission is basically an ad
throwaway613746 26 minutes ago [-]
[dead]
sloptile 40 minutes ago [-]
[flagged]
dang 28 minutes ago [-]
Please don't cross into personal attack, and especially please don't harass newcomers.
None of this is true. Models will soon scale to several million tokens of context. That, combined with the combined experience of millions of feedback cycles, will make software a solved problem for machines, even as humans remain dumb. Yes, even complex software. Complex software is actually better because it is, generally, faster with more features. It’s smarter. Like a jet fighter, the more complex it is, the more capable it is.
Rendered at 17:31:19 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
People forget that good engineering isn't "the strongest bridge", but the cheapest bridge that just barely won't fail under conditions.
That can't be right? What about safety factors
What if we built things that are meant to last? Would the world be better for it?
The pattern was always: ship fast, fix/document later, but when "later" comes "don't touch what is working".
To date nothing changed yet, I bet it won't change even in the future.
Competition is essentially dead for that segment given there is always outward growth.
With that being said, AI enables smaller players to implement their visions with enough completeness to be viable. And with a hands off approach to code, the underlying technology mindshare does not matter as much.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html