Comment by discreteevent

1 month ago

> I'm not sure how useful it is to say this

I have to be honest and say it's not very useful for me to hear you say this because you make your living from AI consulting and in a previous thread [1] you said that you don't review the code and then that you do. I'm not saying you have psychosis but your take on AI is inconsistent and confusing to me.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49179477

Yeah, that's why I said "I'm not sure how useful it is to say this", because I know a lot of people will be a) offended by the message or b) offended that I was the one to say it.

That particular reference isn't fair though. You need to view that comment in context: https://twitter.com/bcherny/status/2098217573276131577

I'm entirely in agreement with that. The interesting challenge is how we achieve that new high bar.

  • I don't actually buy that tweet from Boris Cherny. When the Claude Code source leaked some months ago, there were many posts on Mastodon about how the revealed code was a shit show, a big pile of hacks. I wish now that I had bookmarked some of those posts.

    • Here's the one I saw most widely cited: https://neuromatch.social/@jonny/116324676116121930

      I wasn't very impressed by that pile-on, personally.

      Has there ever been a rapidly evolving 1,000,000+ line codebase that suitably motivated critics couldn't pick a thousand holes in and conclude that the code was garbage?

      Claude Code is used by millions of people on a daily basis, has generated billions of dollars in revenue, and spits out new features on a weekly basis.

      Many of the complaints I saw - things like the absurdity of asking for JSON and then looping against a schema until it matches - are common patterns for building software against language models, which are weird components to need to tame.

      4 replies →