Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | Arisaka1's commentslogin

I hate how true this is, even as a job seeker. I'm here building things using Next.js when I'm fully aware that I can build them using less than that, yet I must keep going and overcomplicate things in order to add my familiarity with specific technologies with my personal projects on my resume.

And then, there's people who do "resume-driven development" and push for more complexity in their workplace so that they can list real-life work experience for the next door to open. I know someone who made a tool that just installs Java JDK + IDE + DBearer using Rust, so that he can claim that he used Rust in the previous company he worked for.

I generally think we're more obsessed with being perceived as engineers than actually do engineering.


Just because you can never have absolute safety and security doesn't mean that you should be deliberately introduce more vulnerabilities in a system. It doesn't mtif we're talking about operating systems or the browser itself.

We shouldn't be sacrificing every trade-off indiscriminately out of fear of being left behind in the "AI world".


To make it clear, I am fully against these types of AI tools. At least for as long as we did not solve security issues that come with them. We are really good at shipping bullshit nobody asked for without acknowledging security concerns. Most people out there can not operate a computer. A lot of people still click on obvious scam links they've received per email. Humanity is far from being ready for more complexity and more security related issues.

The other grossly understated downside of lacking server browsers is how the player nowadays relies on the system to match him with the "best match" they can get. This opens the door to all sorts of skinner box manipulations, such as the game shoving you into teams where the probability of you winning is low, only to put you into a match where the probability of winning is high.

The ability to introduce randomization of reward around a layer of "skill issue" and plausible deniability for the matchmaker. Elo/bronze hell exists because even the worst players can just swing up and down their rank, whereas if you didn't had any other choice but play with whoever is in your local server (or LAN part, but I digress) then the only solution for you is to observe and adjust.

I'm from Greece and, we used to have lots of LAN arenas before fast internet connections became accessible. I'd get my face pushed by skilled people, and while I'd feel bad about it, the fact that I was playing with my friends and enjoyed myself made it all tolerable. Eventually I gave up feeling bad having negative k/d ratios, and could finally spectate and learn from others. The result was me becoming good enough to join my local CS clan. We never became best in the country, but I have really fond memories both from chilling as friends and highlights from matches.


My fear is that this will make the gap between newcomers and veterans so much bigger that the junior market will suffer more than ever before.

However, according to a few job openings in my area, "junior AI powered engineer" is actually a thing that some companies ask. Is it a good idea? I'd say no it's not. Do the managers who do the hiring while reading all the hype care? Definitely not the ones who ask for AI powered juniors.


You made me realize exactly why I love skill-based video games, and shun the gacha games (especially those with PvP). You swiped to gain power over players who don't. Yay?

The knowledge check will also slowly transfer towards the borders of fast iteration and not necessarily knowledge depth. The end goal is to make a commodity out of the myth of the 10x dev, and take more leverage away from the devs.


Completely anecdotal but the combination of React FE + Python BE seems to be popular in startups and small-sized companies, especially for full-stack positions.

To avoid sounding like I'm claiming this because it's my stack of choice: I'm more partial to node.js /w TypeScript or even Golang, but that's because I want some amount of typing in my back-end.


Python3 has a lot of typing now, you can have it in your python BE if you choose.


I'll have to take another look but I always thought that the Python type experience was a bit more clunky than what TS achieved for JS. I guess there's also a critical mass of typing in packages involved.


Placing greater weight in our own anecdotes over randomized trials and researches is what gave us some of the worst experiences in recent years.


StackExchange surveys are not “randomized trials” and only qualifies as the lowest quality research.


That's an awfully profit-scoped way to frame human competence and assumes profit as the end goal. What about hobbyists?


My point is not to presume the competence of others (which, frankly, I don't care about outside of like Knuth and "are you making my life harder at work"), but to point out we should establish our own view of whether we're competent enough based on what our goals are. People tell me I'm a good programmer; I don't really see it. This used to bother me. It doesn't anymore because I've found other things to enjoy in life.


I absolutely do that because I got so bullied that my personality shifted from self-expression to emulation. I realized that just this week because I caught myself copying a coworker he's respected and has people laughing with his jokes, and wondered why I have the tendency to do it.

But I never expected that this would also link back to my tendency to skip an article and just stick to what the top comments of a section have, HN or Reddit.


> wondered why I have the tendency to do it

Because when you were still swinging from the trees a some generations back that was a survival trait.


I once had chatGPT run a research about popular stacks in job openings across Europe. Not that I don't already work with React + some Python, I was just doing it out of curiosity for it's results.

After 5-7 minutes of work, it returns many results, yet it's citing 2 specific websites as sources, one of which was blogspam you'd write to get visibility on Google results.

So I guess we're heading towards a future where websites will be optimized to increase the probability of chatGPT and AI tools to use you as a reference and link to you with confidence, regardless of their sources.


Why not just pay the AI company to do that and not bother altering the website?


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

Search: