Thread

1. miranaproarrow · 1790105899 · focus · HN ↗

   My manager who vibe coded our entire webapp in claude design. Has difficulty understanding why its still not production ready.

   My job is to wire to our backend data, and a lot of these wiring require me to be in there and actually think about the features. These take time, and I just haven't figure out a way to speed this process up with Claude.

   1. godwinson__4-8 · 1790108494 · focus · HN ↗

      Why is this reassuring?

      Why won't smarter and cheaper models in the future be able to automate this part for your manager as well? How novel is the feature set? Is it he has a knowledge gap or the model is incapable of something? What expertise are you bringing to bear that is beyond the scope of a future harness/model? Why wouldn't such a model simply fill in the blanks for your management, perhaps observing a diff of whatever you did? How do you verify the correctness of your thinking? Why could a future model not replicate this process?

      I am just very puzzled by these sort of takes as we approach the end of 2026.

      1. tripleee · 1790109109 · focus · HN ↗

         Because smarter for an LLM isn't operating on the same scale as human intelligence

         Making a calculator a billion times "smarter" isn't going to make it able to wash dishes

         1. godwinson__4-8 · 1790109663 · focus · HN ↗

            This would be a great point if his manager asked him to wash the dishes. Who knows, in 10 years time if he finds himself with such a job he might consider himself lucky.

            Anyway I hope I get an answer to my actual questions. Engaging with your "it's just a calculator" denialism is an obvious dead-end. Have a good day buddy.

            1. tripleee · 1790109931 · focus · HN ↗

               Completely missing my point there. I wasn't saying it's a calculator. I was saying it's not a human intelligence and there's no reason to think it'll stand in for every responsibility we have.

               Name me one human that can describe grandmaster level chess strategy but also loses to a random-only chess bot - that was the case for LLMs for a long time

               My point is LLMs aren't humans. They're not a toddler slowly getting smarter, and when they're smarter they'll be able to do everything a human can do. It's a different scale entirely.

               1. godwinson__4-8 · 1790110411 · focus · HN ↗

                  I didn't ask for every responsibility I asked for his specific responsibility.

                  Why don't you calm down and read my question again and you will see the only one "completely missing the point" is you.

                  You're arguing with someone else. I didn't make a claim that LLMs were human. If you're going to respond to me then engage with what I'm exactly saying. Go back and read it again, if you can manage it.

                  1. tripleee · 1790110480 · focus · HN ↗

                     ok

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.