zlacker

>>gmays+(OP)
Everyone keeps being angry at me when I mention that the way things are going, future development will just be based on "did something wrong while writing code? all good, throw everything out and rewrite, keep pulling the level of the slot machine and eventually it'll work". It's a fair tactic, and it might work if we make the coding agents cheap enough.

I'll add a personal anecdote - 2 years ago, I wrote a SwiftUI app by myself (bare you, I'm mostly an infrastructure/backend guy with some expertise in front end, where I get the general stuff, but never really made anything big out of it other than stuff on LAMPP back in 2000s) and it took me a few weeks to get it to do what I want to do, with bare minimum of features. As I was playtesting my app, I kept writing a wishlist of features for myself, and later when I put it on AppStore, people around the world would email me asking for some other features. But life, work and etc. would get into way, and I would have no time to actually do them, as some of the features would take me days/weeks.

Fast forward to 2 weeks ago, at this point I'm very familiar with Claude Code, how to steer multiple agents at a time, quick review its outputs, stitch things together in my head, and ask for right things. I've completed almost all of the features, rewrote the app, and it's already been submitted to AppStore. The code isn't perfect, but it's also not that bad. Honestly, it's probably better from what I would've written myself. It's an app that can be memory intensive in some parts, and it's been doing well from my testings. On top of it, since I've been steering 2-3 agents actively myself, I have the entire codebase in my mind. I also have overwhelming amount of more notes what I would do better and etc.

My point is, if you have enough expertise and experience, you'll be able to "stitch things together" cleaner than others with no expertise. This also means, user acquisition, marketing and data will be more valuable than the product itself, since it'll be easier to develop competing products. Finding users for your product will be the hard part. Which kinda sucks, if I'll be honest, but it is what it is.

>>tokioy+2Ac
I think for beginners, it might be more like a roguelike? You go off in the wrong direction entirely and die, but you learn something and start again.

Since we have version control, you can restart anywhere if you think it's a good place to fork from. I like greenfield development, but I suspect that there are going to be a lot more forks from now on, much like the game modding scene.

>>skybri+ZKc
The thing about beginners (and I'm sure we can all relate to them from our past) is they won't really know which path is good or bad. In roguelike, when you make a mistake, you kinda know why you made a mistake and how you got there. For beginners, even if you have version control, you never developed that "sense of what feels right". Or "there HAS TO BE a simpler way of doing it, i just have to ask" sense. I have no idea how to describe it, but I think you might get what I mean?

>>tokioy+qOc
Well, at some point you'd learn by maxing out your credit card on your cloud bill, or getting hacked and losing all your users' data, or...

Companies with money-making businesses are gonna find themselves in an interesting spot when the "vibe juniors" are the vast majority of the people they can find to hire. New ways will be needed to reduce the risk.