zlacker

>>meetpa+(OP)
My frustration with using these models for programming in the past has largely been around their tendency to hallucinate APIs that simply don't exist. The Gemini 2.5 models, both pro and flash, seem significantly less susceptible to this than any other model I've tried.

There are still significant limitations, no amount of prompting will get current models to approach abstraction and architecture the way a person does. But I'm finding that these Gemini models are finally able to replace searches and stackoverflow for a lot of my day-to-day programming.

>>segpha+J4
> no amount of prompting will get current models to approach abstraction and architecture the way a person does

I find this sentiment increasingly worrisome. It's entirely clear that every last human will be beaten on code design in the upcoming years (I am not going to argue if it's 1 or 5 years away, who cares?)

I wished people would just stop holding on to what amounts to nothing, and think and talk more about what can be done in a new world. We need good ideas and I think this could be a place to advance them.

>>jstumm+jH
I’ve been thinking about the SWE employment conundrum in a post-LLM world for a while now, and since my livelihood (and that of my loved ones’) depends on it, I’m obviously biased. Still, I would like to understand where my logic is flawed, if it is. (I.e I’m trying to argue in good faith here)

Isn’t software engineering a lot more than just writing code? And I mean like, A LOT more?

Informing product roadmaps, balancing tradeoffs, understanding relationships between teams, prioritizing between separate tasks, pushing back on tech debt, responding to incidents, it’s a feature and not a bug, …

I’m not saying LLMs will never be able to do this (who knows?), but I’m pretty sure SWEs won’t be the only role affected (or even the most affected) if it comes to this point.

Where am I wrong?

>>sirsto+1b1
I think an analogy that is helpful is that of a woodworker. Automation just allowed them to do more things at in less time.

Power saws really reduced time, lathes even more so. Power drills changed drilling immensely, and even nail guns are used on roofing project s because manual is way too slow.

All the jobs still exist, but their tools are way more capable.

>>MR4D+od1
Automation allows one worker to do more things in less time, and allows an organization to have fewer workers doing those things. The result, it would seem, is more people out of work and those who do have work having reduced wages, while the owner class accrues all the benefits.

>>babysh+uf1
Table saws do not seem to have reduced the demand for good carpenters. Demand is driven by a larger business cycle and comes and goes with the overall housing market.

As best I can tell, LLMs don’t really reduce the demand for software engineers. It’s also driven by a larger business cycle and, outside of certain AI companies, we’re in a bit of a tech down cycle.

In almost every HN article about LLMs and programming there’s this tendency toward nihilism. Maybe this industry is doomed. Or maybe a lot of current software engineers just haven’t lived through a business down cycle until now.

I don’t know the answer but I know this: if your main value is slinging code, you should diversify your skill set. That was true 20 years ago, 10 years ago, and is still true today.

>>moregr+Kn1
> Table saws do not seem to have reduced the demand for good carpenters. Demand is driven by a larger business cycle and comes and goes with the overall housing market.

They absolutely did. Moreover, they tanked the ability for good carpenters to do work because the market is flooded with cheap products which drives prices down. This has happened across multiple industries resulting in enshittification of products in general.