Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | shane_b's comments login

I don’t know where people are getting such low numbers. I’ve been a developer for 10 years. I care a lot about optimizing my workflow.

When copilot was released, I’d say I got a 15% increase. When ChatGPT was released it was like 50% at least and I can’t imagine going back. I remember how slow it was now.

My advice would be to force yourself to leverage it more or something. I hate googling now. I’ll find a page, copy the entire thing into gpt4 and the file i’m using with the error message and i have to do nothing.

How are y’all using it?


curious to hear more about the kind of projects you're working on and the kind of problems it helps you with.

> I’ll find a page, copy the entire thing into gpt4 and the file i’m using with the error message and i have to do nothing.

can you explain more about this I don't quite understand this passage.


the history of exercise is just living. not that long ago, just living required constant movement. in my own childhood i had to do a ton of labor that was just living, not a job.


> history of exercise is just living

The Greeks and Romans intentionally exercised outside daily toils.


The rich slave owning Greeks and Romans while not marching to another battle? Do we know anything about the exercise habits of the poor (other than the dude in the bathtub) or the slaves?


> rich slave owning Greeks and Romans while not marching to another battle?

Yes.

> Do we know anything about the exercise habits of the poor (other than the dude in the bathtub) or the slaves?

This is a notorious blind spot in our knowledge of our antiquity. It’s partly why the ruins at Pompeii were so interesting.


this is very good library that i was a little nervous about at first but i used it to build a custom command line tool for my business and it’s helped so much. it’s also very easy to create fancy cli features that make it feel like a real application.


there’s a zero percent chance people will be laid off and be happy. same with seeing people be laid off. there is no right thing to say


I know a handful of people who have been laid off. Each one was very angry about being laid off - it was unfair, the boss always had it in for me, etc.

The ones I talked to a year later would ruefully admit it was a net positive for them. They were forced to reevaluate their careers and make corrections. One, for example, said it gave him the kick in the pants to start his own business, which he'd always wanted to do. Another told me it gave him the motivation for getting clean from drugs (the reason he was laid off was showing up for work high).


Companies laying people off are not doing well, and it is a lot easier to do well in an environment that is doing well.


Being laid off is a lot less traumatic to people than getting fired, so layoffs are done to periodically let low performers go in a way that preserves their dignity, and makes it easier for them to get another job.


CEOs have feelings…


they traded innocence for humility and tolerance


the benefits of vanilla implementation fix the problems that come with lack of training. like not understanding the low level api

training means so many things but in general, if it’s not “how we do work here” then it’s lacking at most orgs i’ve seen


> Isn't this exactly the same as bringing in a new developer to work on your custom web app build that does everything differently to everyone else? he has to learn your strategies for routing, caching, state propagation, etc, and has no external resources to help him.

it does seem that way. i’d add that even with established technologies, a company should have a set way to do stuff that is trained internally. frameworks et al frequently have multiple strategies or you want to extend a framework primitive.


You overestimate knowledge retention.

At one point there is a new hire who instead of learning why and how stuff was done starts overdoing everything because "previous people were shitty developers".

You will have easier time hiring people with standard stack as well, no one wants to work on hodgepodge of code where some dev 2 years ago did something and left never to be found again. Developers don't want to invest in some magic stack because it will be easier for them to switch jobs if they keep doing Angular/React.

If someone would be claiming he was building web apps without frameworks I assume he was not working in teams or at least not in teams of big companies. Which would be a red flag for me.


i don’t think building your own framework is a good idea. react still has plenty of possible patterns to decide between even after making the decision to use it. a team should have decided upon ways to do stuff even inside of a framework/technology/language.


if the concern is abuse, i wouldn’t give it to gov


Right, because it's better to trust that analysis to FaceBook. Why they could even pop-up something suggesting you seek help.


i assume this is sarcasm which is unhelpful.

the original claim was to trust no one. my comment was the government should also not be trusted.

people put on such a front on social i wouldn’t trust any analysis. especially not health related


If that was your original intent, you phrased it really badly. You didn't say "trust no one". People were asking what to do with it, and you said "i wouldn’t give it to gov". That isn't "this is dangerous and shouldn't exist".


> I'd say very little good can come from this.

> if the concern is abuse

not my intent, OP. the comment i replied to suggested gov instead. i made a comment about gov

there was as much reason to assume what i meant as much as what you assumed


I see what you're saying now. Sorry to misinterpret you.


The concern is directing public resources in ways that are most effective. I'm thinking about populations and not individuals.


i like your idea of improving effectiveness

population level data of social media is vulnerable to abuse by gov. social media is a poor input and gov will exploit ambiguity to their benefit.


this thread is full of hypotheticals and blaming irrational actors for fear of nukes.

the only country to drop nukes on enemies is the US.

our fear of enemies using nukes has set us back half a century in energy.

why do we focus on hypotheticals when there’s no evidence for 80 years?


> this thread is full of hypotheticals and blaming irrational actors for fear of nukes.

I think it's a by-definition thing at this point, that if a nuclear war occurs it will be due to irrational actors. The only rational thing to do with nukes is not use them.

> the only country to drop nukes on enemies is the US

True, the first time they were used in warfare was by the US in 1945. There's no reason to think that's the end of the list.

> our fear of enemies using nukes has set us back half a century in energy.

I don't understand this. What nuclear power plants have not been built, due to fears of thermonuclear weapons? I'm sure there are a few instances (i.e. Iran), but the vast majority of sluggish nuclear power plant building is due to local opposition for reasons both misguided and not.

> why do we focus on hypotheticals when there’s no evidence for 80 years?

Well, because there's been nothing to sample in the extremely short time-span of 80 years! 80 years isn't even a century. It's minuscule in terms of human history. We've gone longer than that between major pandemics, volcanic eruptions that cause a never-ending winter. Solar flares that destroy all electrical grids, etc.

Existential events don't happen every day ya know :)


> I think it's a by-definition thing at this point, that if a nuclear war occurs it will be due to irrational actors. The only rational thing to do with nukes is not use them.

> There's no reason to think that's the end of the list.

i agree with both. my point is rational/irrational actor has nothing to do with it. i think retaliation would be irrational but many would make a case otherwise. a case could be made for initiating conflict as well if weighing against hypothetical lives saved. that's frequently how ww2 usage is justified.

> What nuclear power plants have not been built, due to fears of thermonuclear weapons?

fair point. while i agree there is a distinction between weapons and energy, i think the branding applies to both. also, if we didn't fear nukes in the wrong hands, every country would have the tech for energy. wikipedia says 32 countries have nuclear power plants. i understand our fear, but i'd say it's also why nuclear power isn't ubiquitous.

> Well, because there's been nothing to sample in the extremely short time-span of 80 years!

absolutely. very short time. there were ample opportunities to use nukes in warfare even in that short time. my comments were focusing on the fact we use hypotheticals of irrational actors when the only evidence we have is counter. there's no telling what happens going forward.


While the spectre of nuclear conflict should not hold us back from use of nuclear power generation, there is plenty of real evidence here that we have been extremely lucky so far.

There have been many times where we have come very close to global nuclear war and it had been adverted by chance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_close_calls

Also take a look at past 'broken arrow' events: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_nuclear_accid...

One day we are going to roll a critical failure.


these are interesting, thanks for sharing

i'm in favor of getting rid of weapons. if nuclear power is ubiquitous, i don't know how that would be possible though.


Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

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

Search: