Hacker News
points by d_silin 10 hours ago | 0 comments
The longer I think about the impact of AI on software development, the more I see parallels between "pets" and "cattle" types of software projects. Or more aptly, fine china and disposable styrofoam plates. LLM-based development allows large-scale production of essentially disposable software. Which is fine for many business cases - software is a cost for them. Even with software as products, it makes sense to optimize production costs.

But open-source software is far more about the process than the product. And therefore longevity of resulting software can be expected to be far greater. Foundations of our software stack - libraries, source control operating systems, compilers, databases and numerous other pieces require people capable and willing to do a long-term care of the software - hence, the community that need to last decades. Linux and PostgreSQL is 35 years old, git is 21, OpenSSL 28.

I believe human-only software development will remain for the foreseeable future, despite the growth of LLM-based ones, just like mass-produced grocery bread didn't displace the artisanal bakeries.

[–] tripleee 10 hours ago
Why can't LLMs be used for long-term care of a software project?

This seems to be more on the tool-wielder than the tool.

Linux itself is receiving LLM-assisted code (a quick search saying 20% at the moment, although I don't know how accurate that is)

[–] TuxSH 8 hours ago
LLM use != vibe coding (latter should be reserved to "cattle" projects)

One can use LLMs to find vulns and/or review hand-written code, for example. But to answer your question, one doesn't understand code they didn't design nor write themselves.

[–] d_silin 9 hours ago
LLM don't care. Humans do, but humans with LLMs are more prone to "drive-by" style of software development or substituting "expensive" ingredient (human time and attention) with "cheap" one (LLM tokens).