<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Hacker News: llmssuck</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=llmssuck</link><description>Hacker News RSS</description><docs>https://hnrss.org/</docs><generator>hnrss v2.1.1</generator><lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2026 10:44:40 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hnrss.org/user?id=llmssuck" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by llmssuck in "Super ZSNES – GPU Powered SNES Emulator"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Why is this using Unity? That's insane? How do we know this is not malware?</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2026 21:17:16 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47927426</link><dc:creator>llmssuck</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47927426</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47927426</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by llmssuck in "Super ZSNES – GPU Powered SNES Emulator"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>"no vibe coding" is different from "no ai". I'm not sure where the authors are going with this. No autocomplete? What level of autocomplete? No "deep learning"?</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2026 21:16:37 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47927415</link><dc:creator>llmssuck</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47927415</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47927415</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by llmssuck in "Men who stare at walls"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Interesting example for sure. Walking the woods seems more complex, but I still think there is a real difference between "this character Xenia in a TV show acts an actor inside a TV show inside this current one and she likes to eat brownies with yellow cream on top" versus "I see trees with many leaves".<p>TikTok I have no knowledge of, but for sure seeing something like "Arab dude wearing suspicious looking outfit playing unknown instrument that I now have a name for playing a tune I did not know the name of but I do now says weird cultural thing that is highly specific to his or her locale but it kind of makes sense because of clues inside the video" is still very high-load compared to "I see a bird there that I do not care about in any way shape or form but I do remember it is blue".</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2026 20:53:45 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47927168</link><dc:creator>llmssuck</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47927168</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47927168</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by llmssuck in "AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Just to offer a counter-example, using AI makes programming bearable again for me. Most of programming comes down to a short - edit: not quit so short but you may understand the figure of speech.. - list of things which are repeated ad infinitum in myriad variations.<p>I don't have to slog through yet _another_ way to sort, split, combine a list, open a file, show a UI component, handle events, logging, make data flow through some type of "database", serialize and deserialize endless things, implement yet another protocol in $whateverishotnow, managing authn, authz, the list is endless.<p>The interesting part of programming, for me, is deciding on and capturing the domain in a tight, surprisingly simple yet powerful architecture. This is hard - for me - and actually has very little to do with "programming" per se, meaning it has nothing to do with wrangling syntax/low-level semantics of whatever platform I'm on and fighting package managers to name just two highly depressing parts of my job. I don't like typing code. I am doing it my entire life and I still don't like it.<p>I like coming up with invariants and ways of guarding them. To find simple decompositions that turn a hairy, ungodly blob of a problem into a manageable almost trivial network of not-so-complicated things. The not-so-complicated things themselves.. I don't care in the slightest about them. Opening files, managing database connections, forms, the mechanics of i18n, typing the word "class", you name it. I find it exceedingly boring.<p>Perhaps I am more of the architect type, but I find managing a bunch of AIs and making sure they don't stray from My Path is easy on the mind. Programming works on my level of abstraction finally.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2026 13:25:20 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47921277</link><dc:creator>llmssuck</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47921277</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47921277</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by llmssuck in "Men Who Stare at Walls"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I understand your point, but a slightly more positive reading might be that the quantity of information consumed, while perhaps unable to be precisely quantified, can be related to the type of content being perceived.<p>Staring at wall produces little information in and of itself, perhaps through reflection, but staring at a TV produces a load of information, most of which is useless like names of characters, their favorite dresses, what food is being eaten where, etc. You can learn a lot by just passively observing even "dumb" TV especially if it contains foreign content or skills like cooking or sports. Again, not saying all of it is relevant to your life, but that's a different issue.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 27 Apr 2026 13:11:44 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47921135</link><dc:creator>llmssuck</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47921135</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47921135</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by llmssuck in "Average is all you need"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Just want to add this is my experience as well. Just solid coworkers. Of course they mess up sometimes, but easier to fix up than with humans and their politic and egos. I find I can actually reason for once instead of always fighting and deferring to whomever has The Biggest Opinion and not rarely just the loudest voice.<p>I think many people here work at nice, large places with reasonable and knowledgeable colleagues that are cooperative and mostly rational and try to do the right thing. In my experience that is not a common or widespread thing. Of course I only have small to medium business experience, but that's still a pretty good chunk of the economy. LLMs are an absurd, ridiculous win in those kinds of environments.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2026 20:31:59 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47810254</link><dc:creator>llmssuck</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47810254</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47810254</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by llmssuck in "SDL bans AI-written commits"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I know it's unpopular to say (here), but I see it all the time. Myself I sometimes cannot recognize what I wrote and what the agent wrote. It's just that I often have a physical memory of typing it, but that's it. (I also saw a lot of garbage, to be fair.)<p>There is quite a bit of skill to it, however. You cannot just take an AI from blank to "good code" without doing work. Yes, it takes work and quite a bit of it. By this I mean you have to write a good code style guide and a proper explanation of your architectural style(s), your preferences, your goals, plenty of examples, etc. Proper thought has to be put into this.<p>If you come across bad code, you need to investigate not castigate: why did this happen? How can we prevent this in the future? Those sort of processes need to become second nature. They actually should be already, because it's not that much different from managing a bunch of humans.<p>Humans come with lots of implicit knowledge and you also select them to match your company's style when you're hiring them. When they sit down at their keyboards you (and society) has already guided them towards a desirable path. (And even then they often still misfire.)<p>AI agents operate different. Their range of expression is completely alien to us. We cannot be both von Neumanns and complete morons. LLMs have no problem there. It takes a good while to get used to that.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2026 18:38:24 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47797638</link><dc:creator>llmssuck</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47797638</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47797638</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by llmssuck in "The economics of software teams: Why most engineering orgs are flying blind"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I suppose the complexity of the domain is the main driver of the difficulty level. Perhaps that's the intuition that I'm trying to pin down: programming itself, the typing of words for the compiler, the act of converting pure thought into code, seems mechanical at best. But if you include the act of abstraction itself, then I concede it changes the equation. I don't find it to be all that clear what is and isn't programming to be honest.<p>Especially once you get to describe your abstractions in plain (or slightly technical) English instead of code I find it hard to say "programming" is being performed, but in many ways the case could be made that it remained the same and only the shape of the artifacts is different now.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2026 20:27:14 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47757391</link><dc:creator>llmssuck</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47757391</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47757391</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by llmssuck in "The economics of software teams: Why most engineering orgs are flying blind"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Fair enough, but I think that never really worked all that well. What I mean is that the term "programming" would then essentially cover anything and everything that can be put into an algorithm of some sort. Neutrino detection, user management dashboards, CRUD APIs, basically everything is programming.<p>It would explain a lot of misunderstanding between "programmers" though.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2026 20:21:07 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47757314</link><dc:creator>llmssuck</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47757314</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47757314</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by llmssuck in "The economics of software teams: Why most engineering orgs are flying blind"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>We might have different concepts of "hard", but if I were a construction worker I think I would agree. Hell, I'm a developer and I agree. Figuring out what to do definitely is the hard part. The rest is work and can be sweaty, but it's not <i>hard</i> as if it's full of impenetrable math or requiring undiscovered physics. It's just time-consuming and in the case of construction work physically tiring.<p>It might be that I have been doing this for too long and no longer see it.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2026 18:55:16 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47756385</link><dc:creator>llmssuck</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47756385</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47756385</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by llmssuck in "The economics of software teams: Why most engineering orgs are flying blind"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>> it was an extremely hard engineering problem<p>But that is not programming then? Doing voice recognition in the 90s, missile guidance systems, you name it, those are hard things, but it's not the "programming" that's hard. It's the figuring out how to do it. The algorithms, the strategy, etc.<p>I might be misunderstanding, but I cannot see how programming itself can be challenging in any way. It's not <i>trivial</i> per se or quickly over, but I fail to see how it can be anything but mechanical in and of itself. This feels like "writing" as in grammar and typing is the hard part of writing a book.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2026 18:49:47 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47756318</link><dc:creator>llmssuck</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47756318</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47756318</guid></item></channel></rss>