th3byrdm4n (u/th3byrdm4n)

th3byrdm4n commented on ChatGPT Pulse openai.com/index/introduc... · Posted by u/meetpateltech

xwowsersx · 3 months ago

Google's edge obvious here is the deep integration it already has with calendar, apps, and chats and what not that lets them surface context-rich updates naturally. OpenAI doesn't have that same ecosystem lock-in yet, so to really compete they'll need to get more into those integrations. I think what it comes down to ultimately is that being "just a model" company isn't going to work. Intelligence itself will go to zero and it's a race to the bottom. OpenAI seemingly has no choice but to try to create higher-level experiences on top of their platform. TBD whether they'll succeed.

th3byrdm4n · 3 months ago

Isolation might also prove to have some staying power.

th3byrdm4n commented on Ask HN: SWEs how do you future-proof your career in light of LLMs? · Posted by u/throwaway_43793

th3byrdm4n · a year ago

It's lowering the bar for developers to enter the marketplace, in a space that is wildly under saturated. We'll all be fine. There's tons of software to be built.

More small businesses will be able to punch-up with LLMs tearing down walled gardens that were reserved for those with capital to spend on lawyers, consultants and software engineering excellence.

It's doing the same thing as StackOverflow -- hard problems aren't going away, they're becoming more esoteric.

If you're at the edge, you're not going anywhere.

If you're in the middle, you're going to have a lot more opportunities because your throughput should jump significantly so your ROI for mom and pop shops finally pencils.

Just be sure you actually ship and you'll be fine.

th3byrdm4n commented on I Am Tired of AI ontestautomation.com/i-am... · Posted by u/Liriel

low_tech_love · a year ago

The most depressing thing for me is the feeling that I simply cannot trust anything that has been written in the past 2 years or so and up until the day that I die. It's not so much that I think people have used AI, but that I know they have with a high degree of certainty, and this certainty is converging to 100%, simply because there is no way it will not. If you write regularly and you're not using AI, you simply cannot keep up with the competition. You're out. And the growing consensus is "why shouldn't you?", there is no escape from that.

Now, I'm not going to criticize anyone that does it, like I said, you have to, that's it. But what I had never noticed until now is that knowing that a human being was behind the written words (however flawed they can be, and hopefully are) is crucial for me. This has completely destroyed my interest in reading any new things. I guess I'm lucky that we have produced so much writing in the past century or so and I'll never run out of stuff to read, but it's still depressing, to be honest.

th3byrdm4n · a year ago

Honestly, I've developers saying the same thing about IDEs and high level languages.

This new generation of tools add efficiency the same way IntelliJ added efficiency on top of Eclipse which added efficiency on top of Emacs/VI/Notepad/etc.

The more time that someone can focus on the systemsit takes certain types of high-time, [not domain problem specific] skill processes and obfuscated it away so the developer can focus on the most critical aspects of the software.

Yes, sometimes generators do the wrong thing, but it's usually obvious/quick to correct.

Cost of occasional correction is much less than the time to scaffold every punchcard.

th3byrdm4n commented on Ask HN: Should we bring software dev in-house? · Posted by u/45HCPW

t-writescode · a year ago

What does on-call look like for you?

th3byrdm4n · a year ago

It was brutal, but the mentality was - it's brutal now but you have the power to fix it, so engineering hours went into fixing broken windows.

That adopted mentality pays off tech debt fast.

th3byrdm4n commented on Ask HN: Should we bring software dev in-house? · Posted by u/45HCPW

uticus · a year ago

> We're using a third-party product that functions, but barely.

> Our business operates in a specific niche and there are no other providers who cater specifically to our industry.

If you decide to do in-house, I’d recommend thinking about competing against existing as a new revenue stream, and spinning it off as a separate business unit as much as possible. I imagine this is implied in your question but it wasn’t specifically mentioned.

> Besides, can we even attract experienced developers to a non-glamorous industry like logistics?

Yes. Are you kidding? Non-glamorous reads as safe in uncertain times. It’s a positive point that will be a marketing multiplier for attracting talent, if coupled with other indications that your business has clear goals and good ideas.

th3byrdm4n · a year ago

Don’t build it to sell - explicitly. Build it to solve your business problem and tell the guy building it “after we’ve separated ourselves from our competitors and we’ll either declare our company a software company that does logistics, or we’ll set an environment for you to pitch the sale of the software to competitors”

A startup mindset is importantly for the first hires, but selling software is an aspiration not a requirement.

That aspiration can be distracting from simpler business problem solving solutions too, so be clear “new codebase” when we are ready to sell…

Shortcuts for us, no shortcuts on the software resell company.

th3byrdm4n commented on Ask HN: Should we bring software dev in-house? · Posted by u/45HCPW

neilv · a year ago

One idea is to start it as a skunkworks project, with a very experienced and skilled person starting solo.

With the express understanding that, if this is successful, you'd expect them to ultimately lead it (head of engineering, R&D, CTO, or whatever fits).

Greenfield development is appealing, and the big growth potential adds incentive to do that greenfield in a way that's aligned with the goals of the company.

Don't make it super-lucrative initially, to help weed out the serial job-hoppers and the transactional hours-billers who aren't as invested in the long-term success.

On your end, you only need buy-in that, if this succeeds, then company will want to follow through.

With that understanding, it's only a single hire to justify.

If, when you review every 3 months, it's not looking like it will work out, start over with a new champion. Your only lead time is to find one candidate who you're willing to give a shot at it.

It's their responsibility to make the skunkworks so successful that the company is confident in taking the next steps of greater investment.

A complementary possibility to keep in mind is that, if you really execute well on this system, maybe you could spin it off into a subsidiary that provides IT solutions to other companies in your field. (Especially since your own purchasing experience sounds like there's market opportunity.)

th3byrdm4n · a year ago

This summarizes my career nicely.

Great advice IMO.