Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | habinero's commentslogin

None of this is even slightly correct lol

People have been painting with red and yellow ochre and soot for at least 50K years for sure, and probably several hundred thousand years in truth. You don't need a brush, you have fingers or a twig.

The walls on the streets of Pompeii are full of advertising -- they had an election going on and people just scribbled slogans and such on walls. You don't need flyers lol.

The idea that signs or advertising was "artistry" is deeply ahistorical. The reason old stuff looks real fancy is because labor was extremely cheap and materials were expensive.


> People have been painting with red and yellow ochre and soot for at least 50K years for sure,

Compare those to the pigments used (mixed up!) by professional painters, and then to what printers could make.

If you wanted to paint fine art in the 1400s you were possibly making your own canvases, your own paint brushes, and your own paints.

And on top of that you had to be a skilled painter!

> The walls on the streets of Pompeii are full of advertising -- they had an election going on and people just scribbled slogans and such on walls. You don't need flyers lol.

The American revolution included a lot of propaganda courtesy of printing presses and some very rich financers who had a vested interest in a revolution occuring.

Pamphlets everywhere. It is one thing to scribble on a wall, it is another to produce messages at a mass scale.

That sense of scale has been multiplied yet again by AI.


Shoo. Peddle your incel garbage elsewhere.

Oh, so shaming people for number of sexual partners they have is back in fashion? Or it's just ok when we do it to men? Lol, hypocrites.

> nice, timid guys were friendzoned

There's a reason why "nice guy" is a stereotype. The people who describe themselves like this aren't nice or timid, but insecure, angry and judgmental. They tell stories like "women like assholes" to avoid coming to terms with the idea that they're unlikable.


Note that "insecure" is not incompatible with "nice" and "timid". Doesn't make them unlikable.

And it's not that women like assholes. Rather, people (not just women) like the traits that let an asshole get away with being an asshole.


1,000,000% this

The non-wifebeating, non-drug-abusing, non-raping men and boring and unlikeable. It's actually their fault that women fall for the motorcycle riding drug dealers. Got it.

Anyone who thinks like this is absolutely the kind of awful, toxic person who has to make up stories to avoid coming to terms that they are the problem.

> and it always shocked me how bad their ex partners were. Woman are drawn to toxic abusers like men are drawn to OnlyFans models and the real victims are the children

Huh. It, uh, sure is a choice to declare you deliberately only date women with underage children and then blame those women for being too stupid to recognize when they're dating dangerous men. The added bit about men getting away with abuse because women let them is also something.

Abusive men deliberately find vulnerable targets, exploit them, and then blame them.


Sure. But the prerequisite to make this possible is that wonen in general are very much attracted to dangerous men.

That is absolutely not what I said lol, try again.

Please don't treat half of the people on this planet as if they were some alien species. Treat people like people.

People are weird. Men are probably even worse if you really dig deep down what we are interested in on a woman. The kind of thing we prefer not to even think about. What we evolved to like is not always “appropriate “ in a modern society.

Or -- and hear me out -- you're just wrong.

Which is likelier -- that

(1) the behavior of four billion people can be described by a sentence or two

or

(2) you have an extremely small and shallow reference pool and not enough experience and/or capability to understand and escape it?

Bro science isn't real


No. I see this mistake everywhere. You're confusing "knowing everything" or "making assumptions" with "mental maps". They are not at all the same thing.

The benefit of libraries is it's an abstraction and compartmentalization layer. You don't have to use REST calls to talk to AWS, you can use boto and move s3 files around in your code without cluttering it up.

Yeah, sometimes the abstraction breaks or fails, but generally that's rare unless the library really sucks, or you get a leftpad situation.

Having a mental map of your code doesn't mean you know everything, it means you understand how your code works, what it is responsible for, and how it interacts with or delegates to other things.

Part of being a good software engineer is managing complexity like that.


I have literally heard this exact vague phrase about every single stupid model that has come out, plus more than a few companies.

So far it's all been endless unfounded FOMO hype by people who have something to sell or podcasts to be on. I am so tired of it.


Ask around and see if you can find anyone you know who's experienced the November 2025 effect. Claude Code / Codex with GPT-5.1+ or Opus 4.5+ really did make a material difference - they flipped the script from "can write code that often works" to "can write code that almost always works".

I know you'll dismiss that as the same old crap you've heard before, but it's pretty widely observed now.


I’ve been living this experience and using latest models in work throughout this time. The failure modes of LLMs have not fundamentally changed. The makers are not awfully transparent about what exactly they change in each model release the same way you know what changed in i.e., a new Django version. But there’s not been a paradigm shift. I believe/guess (from outside) the big change you think you’re experiencing could be result of many things like better post training processes (RLHF) for models to run a predefined set of commands like always running tests, or other marginal improvements to the models and focusing on programming tasks. To be clear these improvements are welcome and useful, just not the groundbreaking change some claim.

the perimeter of the tasks the LLMs can handle continuously expands at a pretty steady pace

a year ago they could easily one shot full stack features in my hobby next.js apps but imploded in my work codebase

as of opus 4.6 they can now one shot full features in a complex js/go data streaming & analysis tool but implode in low latency voice synthesis systems (...for now...)

just depends on how you're using it (skill issues are a thing) and what you're working on


I uncharitably snarked that AI lets the 0.05X programmers become 0.2X ones, but reading this stuff makes me feel like I was too charitable.

I've never had problems with any of those things after I learned what a code editor was.


Yep, it may be an issue in notepad, which does not have helper like syntax highlighting, auto indent, and line numbers. But I started with IDLE which has all those things. So my next editor was notepad++ and codeblock.

emacs + adhd. the squiggly lines and autocomplete stuff were more distracting than linter/compile errors. rock and a hard place, and ai solved it.

There's no "outgroup", dude, it's just software. Stop anthropomorphizing it. We have more than enough real social problems without making up fake ones.

"Lets be nicer to the robots winky face" is not a solution to this problem. It's just a tool, and this is a technical problem with technical solutions. All of the AI companies could change this behavior if they wanted to.

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

Search: