paulhodge

AI enhances human ability. In this case, it enhanced someone’s ability to be an asshole.

No you’re just deflecting his points with an ad hominem argument. Stop pretending to assume what he ‘truly feels’.

AI is too useful to fail. Worst case with a bust is that startup investment dries up and we have a 'winter' of delayed improvement. But people aren't going to stop using the models we have today.

Agree that LLMs go too far on error catching..

BUT, to play devil's advocate a little: Most human coders should be writing a lot more try/catch blocks than they actually do. It's very common that you don't actually want an error in one section (however unlikely) to interrupt the overall operation. (and sometimes you do, it just depends)

Neat investigation but I didn’t totally follow how the project would be useful for reverse engineering, it seems like a project that would mostly be useful for evading bot checks like web scraping or AI automation.

I think this prediction of "vibe code cleanup" is massively overblown. It's amazing how much code quality doesn't actually matter to the business. Yes we recognize symptoms and downsides of bad code, and yes it matters specifically to the engineers that have to work on it. But only in extreme cases does bad code actually cause an existential threat to the business. The world already runs on bad code.

it's kind of tongue-in-cheek but it would provide the maximum amount of isolation from any upstream package changes. Even if the package versions are removed from NPM (which happens in rare cases), you'd still have a copy.

Pnpm 10.x also has a feature to disallow post-install scripts by default. When using Pnpm you have to specifically enable a dependency to let it run its post-install scripts. It's a great feature that should be the standard.

Yes if someone compromises a package then they can also inject malicious code that will trigger at runtime.

But the thing about the recent NPM supply chain attack - it happened really quickly. There was a chain reaction of packages that got compromised which lead to more authors getting compromised. And I think a big reason why it moved so quickly was because of post-install scripts. If the attack happened more slowly, then the community would have more time to react and block the compromised packages. So just slowing down an attack is valuable on its own.

solution: add your entire 'node_modules' folder to source control.

I think different things are happening...

For experienced engineers, I'm seeing (internally in our company at least) a huge amount of caution and hesitancy to go all-in with AI. No one wants to end up maintaining huge codebases of slop code. I think that will shift over time. There are use cases where having quick low-quality code is fine. We need a new intuition about when to insist on handcrafted code, and when to just vibecode.

For non-experienced engineers, they currently hit a lot of complexity limits with getting a finished product to actually work, unless they're building something extremely simple. That will also shift - the range of what you can vibecode is increasing every year. Last year there was basically nothing that you could vibecode successfully, this year you can vibecode TODO apps and stuff like that. I definitely think that the App Store will be flooded in the coming future. It's just early.

Personally I have a side project where I'm using Claude & Codex and I definitely feel a measurable difference, it's about a 3x to 5x productivity boost IMO.

The summary.. Just because we don't see it yet, doesn't mean it's not coming.

Yeah Dario has said similar things in interviews. The way he explained it, if you look at each specific model (such as Sonnet 3.5) as its own separate company, then each one of them is profitable in the end. They all eventually recoup the expense of training, thanks to good profit margins on usage once they are deployed.

There’s a magic component to rule breaking that a lot of online advice doesn’t usually talk about: You have to actually be right. Your ideas have to be good. Companies don’t want everyone breaking the rules because a lot of devs don’t have the engineering skill to back it up.

So if you start operating as a rogue agent then make sure you are good. Tom Cruise (stuntman and actor) had a quote I love- “Don’t be careful. Be competant.”

I have to agree with the author about not adding "v1" since it's rarely useful.

What actually happens as the API grows-

First, the team extends the existing endpoints as much as possible, adding new fields/options without breaking compatibility.

Then, once they need to have backwards-incompatible operations, it's more likely that they will also want to revisit the endpoint naming too, so they'll just create new endpoints with new names. (instead of naming anything "v2").

Then, if the entire API needs to be reworked, it's more likely that the team will just decide to deprecate the entire service/API, and then launch a new and better service with a different name to replace it.

So in the end, it's really rare that any endpoints ever have "/v2" in the name. I've been in the industry 25 years and only once have I seen a service that had a "/v2" to go with its "/v1".

Imagine a browser with no cross-origin security, lol.