Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by embedding-shape 33 days ago
> Take it up with Anthropic. It's actually their billion-dollar TUI product you're commenting on.

That's like blaming the company making hammers because you're unable to build a lasting house with the hammer, it really isn't up to Anthropic, but all about how you use the tool you're holding.
2 comments
knollimar 33 days ago
Do they also hold their hammer wrong when their TUI flickers for months?
link
embedding-shape 32 days ago
That's just poor engineering, product building and testing, same can happen with/without LLMs, no doubt.
link
knollimar 32 days ago
If the company making hammers can't hold it right, it suggests something about the hammers, no?
link
arcanemachiner 32 days ago
In the case of Claude Code, it suggest a lot about the company making the hammers.
link
embedding-shape 32 days ago
Yeah, they have bad engineers, product people and testers.

Microsoft is pretty shit at launching products, does that mean "products" as a concept is wrong? No, it just means Microsoft is bad at products, not more than that. Not sure why you have to extrapolate over an entire ecosystem just because one actor is bad at something.

link
knollimar 32 days ago
Products isn't the analogy, but in my example it would say something about microsofts tooling and processes.

I wouldn't trust a toolmaker who doesn't know how to use the tools decently.

link
_carbyau_ 32 days ago
> I wouldn't trust a toolmaker who doesn't know how to use the tools decently.

I agree but would extend that qualification:

I wouldn't trust a toolmaker who doesn't know how to use the tools decently for exactly the same field of expertise.

link
godelski 32 days ago 

  > No, it just means Microsoft is bad at products
FYI, that's what people are saying...
link
malfist 33 days ago
This analogy was trotted out every time someone complained about PHP. It wasn't true then, and it isn't true now.
link
embedding-shape 33 days ago
I don't see how it cannot be true. Are you claiming that every developer who uses the same LLM harness + model would produce equal code, regardless of the prompt? That's clearly not true in my experience, and I cannot understand how it could be either.

And if that's not true, then it's quite literally about how you're holding this hammer.

link
malfist 33 days ago
There's a cowboy artist that paints with his penis and does amazing work. If I tried that it'd turn out incredibly poorly, I prefer to paint with paintbrushes.

Just because the naked cowboy can paint well with just his penis, doesn't mean a penis is the right tool for painting. It doesn't matter how you hold your penis, it's not the right tool.

link
freedomben 33 days ago
> There's a cowboy artist that paints with his penis and does amazing work. If I tried that it'd turn out incredibly poorly, I prefer to paint with paintbrushes.

I can't decide which joke to make, either (little dick joke) "well yeah you'd have to be able to see your paintbrush in order to use it" or (big dick joke) "well yeah, if you can't even hold it in two hands, how are you supposed to paint with it?" so I'll just make both :-D

link
embedding-shape 32 days ago
Hmm, ok, I think the penis in case is a bit distracting, can you de-analogize this to their real terms and tell me what this is supposed to mean and be related to developing with LLMs?
link
malfist 32 days ago
Just because you _can_ do something with a tool, doesn't mean it's the right tool for the job. Just because someone has contorted their entire process to adapt to a misshapen tool, and gotten good results, doesn't mean that's the right thing to do.

It is reasonable to both use the right tool for the right job, and demand better tools than you currently have. Success with the wrong tool in the wrong job doesn't mean it's the right tool for the right job.

link
embedding-shape 32 days ago
> Just because you _can_ do something with a tool, doesn't mean it's the right tool for the job. Just because someone has contorted their entire process to adapt to a misshapen tool, and gotten good results, doesn't mean that's the right thing to do.

Ok, I agree with this, don't use the wrong tool for the wrong job.

> It is reasonable to both use the right tool for the right job, and demand better tools than you currently have. Success with the wrong tool in the wrong job doesn't mean it's the right tool for the right job.

Yes, I agree with this too.

I'm still not sure how this relates to LLMs and particular this specific context. I claimed that the output of your agents depend on the developer driving it. You're saying "not every tool is right for every job", I agree with this too, but is that against/for what I said?

Could you just clearly write out exactly what you're arguing for here, no analogies or metaphors, just plain and simple, because I still feel like we're having two different conversations.

link