zlacker

[return to "Cloudlflare builds OAuth with Claude and publishes all the prompts"]
1. unshav+m5[view] [source] 2025-06-02 14:59:07
>>gregor+(OP)
Yup. I'm more skeptic than pro-AI these days, but nonetheless i'm still trying to use AI in my workflows.

I don't actually enjoy it, i generally find it difficult to use as i have more trouble explaining what i want than actually just doing it. However it seems clear that this is not going away and to some degree it's "the future". I suspect it's better to learn the new tools of my craft than to be caught unaware.

With that said i still think we're in the infancy of actual tooling around this stuff though. I'm always interested to see novel UXs on this front.

◧◩
2. qsort+w6[view] [source] 2025-06-02 15:04:30
>>unshav+m5
Probably unrelated to the broader discussion, but I don't think the "skeptic vs pro-AI" distinction even makes that much sense.

For example, I usually come off as being relatively skeptic within the HN crowd, but I'm actually pushing for more usage at work. This kind of "opinion arbitrage" is common with new technologies.

◧◩◪
3. stevek+9D[view] [source] 2025-06-02 18:24:42
>>qsort+w6
One recent post I read about improving the discourse (which I seem to have lost the link...) agrees, but in a different way: adding a "capable vs not" axis. that is, "I believe AI is good enough to replace humans, and I am pro" is different than "I believe AI is good enough to replace humans, and I am against" and while "I believe AI is not good enough to replace humans, and I am pro" is a weird position to take, "I believe AI is not good enough to replace humans, and I am against."

These things are also not binary, they're a full grid of space.

◧◩◪◨
4. baq+bH[view] [source] 2025-06-02 18:53:43
>>stevek+9D
> "I believe AI is not good enough to replace humans, and I am pro" is a weird position to take

Huh? The recipe how to be in this position is literally in the readme of the linked project. You don’t even have to believe it, you just have to work it.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. stevek+7V[view] [source] 2025-06-02 20:30:24
>>baq+bH
I mean at the most extreme: that it can NEVER do so. Someone who holds this position would point to commits like >>44159659
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. baq+VT1[view] [source] 2025-06-03 05:05:23
>>stevek+7V
To that I can only respond with never say never. Not this year? Yes. Not next year? Sign me up. Not in the next 10 years? Let’s say I’m looking at my hardware career options after 20 years in software.
[go to top]