Ask HN: Are 80s high school hobby programmers overwhelmingly pro-AI?
Posted by amichail 1 day ago
Do such people think that AI is truly miraculous and should be made as advanced as possible as quickly as possible?
Comments
Comment by scottLobster 1 day ago
Even our management is pretty honest about this. Our in-house AI platform running near-frontier models from the larger vendors requires manual confirmation of every command executed on a company machine. It's tedious, but aside from establishing a clear line of blame if the AI does something screwy, it also forces you to step through the AI's analysis which can be quite educational.
Comment by jjice 1 hour ago
Comment by lioeters 1 day ago
Comment by codingdave 1 day ago
Most of the folks I talk to in my age group are somewhere between anti-AI and "AI works for specific use cases". I find it is the younger folk who think it is miraculous and want to use it everywhere.
Comment by smcg 1 day ago
Comment by jdlshore 1 day ago
80s hobbiest programmers are GenX, and maybe most execs are GenX, but that doesn’t mean both groups share the same opinions.
Comment by ChiperSoft 1 day ago
Comment by gnz11 1 day ago
Comment by foobarchu 21 hours ago
Comment by tanseydavid 1 day ago
Comment by bhouston 1 day ago
Given I started on an Apple IIe with a green screen and basic, and have since had to shift languages and techniques repeatedly over the decades, I have to be someone that embraces new technology if I want to stay relevant and productive.
This means that I will adopt things that make sense and AI does make sense.
Comment by JohnFen 1 day ago
Comment by egberts1 1 day ago
Moment we create software liability and enforce them, is that moment AI will ship-up or shape-out )I know it's backward(.
Comment by segmondy 1 day ago
Comment by softwarewright 1 day ago
I think AI is a great tool, but requires safeguards. I use it every day, but I use a lot of tools to reign it in, keep it on task, check its results, and force it to follow an engineering process.
I don't know about the "as quickly as possible" part, since there needs to be guardrails, but improving AI should be done sooner rather than later. e.g, instead of training to give the answer it thinks you want to hear, it should be trained to give provably correct answers. instead of being trained and fine tuned and then let loose, it should be able to continuously learn and improve.
While people keep chasing tokens/second and vibe-coding, I'm more interested in correct results per kWh, sustainable and ethical AI. Also, I'm worried that there will be an increasing digital divide between the wealthy and the rest of us, so I do want AI to be available and not locked up just for corporations and governments.
To me, the fun is solving problems, and AI let's me solve more problems, harder problems and more quickly. I was happy to move from assembler programming to high level programming languages, to 4GL, to frameworks, tech stacks, etc. Moving to AI coding is just another shift in solving problems at a higher level with more productivity.
hacking microprocessors was fun. building complex systems using AI is fun, too.
Comment by 1299348 1 day ago
But the majority isn't. In the same manner, the math people who were enthusiastic about AI (before Navier Stokes was proven by a human guided AI!) are the ones that are terminally online and were enthusiastic about Lean before. You simply don't hear about the rest.
Opposing AI under one's real name is dangerous, so one does not get an accurate picture.
Comment by sombragris 1 day ago
And no, I'm not "overwhelmingly" pro-AI. Especially since many of us know that the AI concept is storied and goes a long time even before our generation, and this LLM-based AI isn't really AI in a proper sense.
This "AI" has some good uses, granted, but the cost-benefit ratio is stupidly bad. For all the benefits that I can see with AI, if this means that I have to put up with scrapers aggressively ruining the Web, data centers gobsmacking available resources, and getting GPU and memory prices gouged to death on me, I'd rather pass. It's not an attractive proposition, simply stated.
Worse yet, I teach; and AI-enabled cheating is making my work much harder.
So, pardon me if I'm a little unenthusiastic about this newfangled artificial intelligence that isn't.
Comment by psyklic 15 hours ago
Should the industry go this way, there very possibly will be some reckoning later with a misaligned model.
That said, there are certainly less risky ways to use LLMs positively in development!
Comment by lolakutty 1 day ago
Comment by adamredwoods 1 day ago
It aligns with my general thoughts about mastering a craft.
Comment by jones1618 1 day ago
The thing is 80's hobby programmers also read a ton of science fiction which, unironically, was very pro-tech but also explored the social impact of tech.
Case-in-point: My favorite AI novel of that era was "The Adolescence of P1" which starts with an engineer innocently prompting P1 to dig a foundation for a moonbase as efficiently as possible. He expected it to start deploying robot construction equipment and take a week or two. Instead, P1 redirects a massive cargo of moon rocks in orbit and blows a crater in a few minutes from space.
From there, P1 propagates itself and gains control of everything from the global "Internet" to power grids to all nuclear bases and satellites. Not good.
We THOUGHT numerous cautionary tales like this would inspire rigorous "alignment" guardrails and controls once we needed them but, no. ... It turns out even when AI experts and CEOs themselves are saying there's a "10% chance of total human annihilation" by AI, our government and the tech oligarchs are kind of, sort of, thinking about, maybe, instituting controls.
Please, go back and read more science fiction.
Comment by adamredwoods 1 day ago
Comment by ThrowawayTestr 1 day ago
Comment by lioeters 1 day ago
Comment by olivierestsage 1 day ago
Comment by 9865322689965 21 hours ago
Comment by ogou 22 hours ago
Comment by cake-rusk 1 day ago
Comment by fearmerchant 1 day ago
Comment by BatchJob 23 hours ago
I am not pro AI nor anti AI. since machine learning is not an interest of mine and is not programming I simply have no interest in it.
im also not interested in being a consumer of machine learning products as it relates to my profession.
If I need solutions coded with automation code generators are much faster and reliable. i write them all the time.
The only benefit I derive as a consumer of machine learning at this time is to avoid using the degraded and near useless google search engine for minor lookups of trivia I dont commit to memory. And I do value this very much given the pathetic state of internet search.
As an engineer I can do everything I need and want to do and dont need help building systems. People who do frequently need help enjoy machine learning consumerism more than I do.
As far as what I want in regards to machine learning in the workplace is to be allowed to do my job and not be bothered to use a bunch of junk I dont need.
and the noise around LLMs is annoying and I am anti building data centers and destroying general purpose computing over some corporate lust for power just because an LLM can string a few sentences together.
I am also vehemently against the massive theft of copyrighted content to train LLMs and view LLM output as a form of obfuscated theft.
Comment by Finnucane 1 day ago
Comment by yawpitch 1 day ago
Now, hobby entrepreneurs, that’s different.
Comment by deterministic 16 hours ago
It feels like going from walking to running. Love it!
Comment by LarryMade2 1 day ago
Comment by elzbardico 1 day ago
On the contrary, my experience is that Gen-X programmers are far more sentimental about the machine and languages, while Millenials have been raised in the cult of the VC backed startup money printing machine.
Just compare the zeitgeist of Slashdot circa 2000 with the ethos of HN nowadays.