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

Why is the man's wife worried about being sent to collections? She owes nothing to the hospital, the dead man's estate owes money. Let the hospital line up with the other creditors. She shouldn't be paying her late husband's hospital bills out of her own funds.


I don’t think she likely had to pay a dime and wouldn’t have faced any consequence besides a few months of annoying calls. Her credit score wouldn’t have even been impacted.

I think given this story they totally messed up.


A lot of people are unaware of who is responsible for what, and may be convinced to pay debts they don't owe. And creditors absolutely take advantage of this. Any debt collector worth his salt will hound everyone they can identify until they are told to stop in the particular way the law prescribes.


> besides a few months of annoying calls.

normalizing harassment and fraud, great


Oh, I’m not suggesting this system is normal or sane at all. Merely that OP could have understood it better and paid $0 instead of $33k.


This isn't the same thing. Yes Gmail provides IMAP so you can read it from other clients. The issue here is that Gmail cannot use IMAP to ingest email from other accounts, as it can (or could) using POP3.


Seconded. I am very much still in the mode of copying from the chat window and then editing. I would like to have whatever she is having.


So we replace the task of writing tedious boilerplate with the task of reading the AI's tedious boilerplate. Which takes just as long. And leaves you with less understanding. And is more boring.


All of these people advocating for AI software dev are effectively saying they would prefer to review code instead of write it. To each their own I guess but that just sounds like torture to me.


It's because these people don't know how to write it, think they know how to review it. Ship a todo list app in a day, and then write blog posts about how they are changing the world.


I'm not familiar with the author's work. What % of their time is spent writing code?


The thought alone makes me want to hang up my (professional) keyboard and open a nursery/gardening center.


well said!


You are either a very fast producer or a very slow reader. Claude and Gemini are much faster at producing code than I am, and reviewing their code - twice over, even - still takes less time than writing it myself.


Reviewing code is often slower than writing it. You don't have to be an exceptionally fast coder or slow reviewer for that to be true.


The amount of time I spend going back and forth between the implementation and the test cases to verify that the tests actually fully cover the possible failure cases alone can easily exceed the time spent writing it, and that's assuming I don't pull the branch locally and start stepping through it in the debugger.

The idea that AI will make development faster because it eliminates the boring stuff seems quite bold because until we have AGI, someone still needs to verify the output, and code review tends to be even more tedious than writing boilerplate unless you're speed-reading through reviews.


If this was the case, regular code review as a practice would be entirely unworkable.


"regular" code review is indeed a total theater, a travesty, a farce.

Real, meticulous code review takes absolutely forever.


This speaks to the low quality assurance bar that most of the software industry lives by.

If you're programming for a plane's avionics, as an example, the quality assurance bar is much, much higher. To the point where any time-saving benefits of using an LLM are most likely dwarfed by the time it takes to review and test the code.

It's easy to say LLM is a game-changer when there are no lives at stake, and therefore the cost of any errors is extremely low, and little to no QA occurs prior to being pushed to production.


Interesting point! I'd like to explore this a bit more.

Would you mind going into a bit more specifics/details on why regular code review practice would become unworkable, like which specific part(s) of it?


Huh? Why? How? Say the code takes one day to write, and two days to review. What about that is unworkable?


Are you, though? Reading code is harder, potentially much harder.[1]

And I suspect the act of writing it yourself imparts some lower level knowledge you don't get by skimming the output of an AI.

[1] https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/05/26/reading-code-is-li...


I think he is specifically referring to boilerplate code. It is not hard to understand boilerplate code.


But you definitely don't understand it nearly as well as if you wrote it. And you're the one that needs to take responsibility for adding it to your codebase.


In this thread, we pretend that the difficult and time-consuming part of a code review is all the reading you have to do.


then you are a terribly sloppy reviewer


Indeed, instead of writing code to shave a Yak, we're now instead reviewing how the Yak was (most-shittily) shaved.


>So we replace the task of writing tedious boilerplate with the task of reading the AI's tedious boilerplate. Which takes just as long. And leaves you with less understanding. And is more boring.

These all sound like your projected assumptions. No, it generally does not take longer to review sizable code changes than it does to write it. This is further alleviated if the code passes tests, either existing or new ones created by the ai.


> Which takes just as long.

This has never once been my experience. Its definitely less fun but it takes way less time.


and probably results in a greater net energy consumption/carbon output


The Inform Designer's Manual is mostly about Inform 6 programming, but has a lot of material on game design.

https://www.inform-fiction.org/manual/DM4.pdf

Crimes Against Mimesis was a famous tract in its day. I don't know how things have moved on since then.

https://www.rickandviv.net/index.php/2004/08/18/crimes-again...


"You are a total wimp for wanting gloves in this weather! Here they are though, you weakling."


Still acknowledges that they understand youre feeling cold and that you'd rather not be.

I guess it doesn't agree that it's something you should be feeling, just that you are feeling it.

Maybe its a definions thing, idk which of the two validation is supposed to refer to


> which of the two validation is supposed to refer to

In this context, it's the former. If I say, "It's dumb that you feel that way but here's you're stupid gloves," to a toddler, I solved their problem but I also likely made them feel like their problem is somehow not a "valid" one. Especially when this happens repeatedly to children is when they grow up with particularly anti-social behaviors, for fear of others abusing them similarly.


New Complete Vegetarian by Rose Elliot is a well used book in our kitchen.


Small World! I have a copy of her book Gourmet Vegetarian Cooking from 1982, bought when I was a broke student. I had already planned earlier today to use one of its recipes for dinner tonight: Brown Nut Rissoles. !!!!

It's been a great source of inspiration and I know a few of the recipes essentially by heart. My main comment now is that the ingredients lists reflect the range of veg and herbs that you typically could find in a 1982 UK shop, and I often substitute more exotic ingredients that weren't readily available then.

As others have said elsewhere here, after many years you typically don't need to slavishly follow the steps in a recipe (except perhaps for baking where precise ratios of ingredients can be important). For some cooks (notably Delia Smith) I've simplified their recipes over the years to reduce the number of discrete steps, utensils and cooking time involved. The results might not look as camera-ready perfect as the pic in the books, but the taste can be indistinguishable, especially when throwing something together quickly for a weekday evening meal.


This is exactly what we do too. I even have a hobby of collapsing Julia Child (and now David Chang) recipes into something... manageable in say 2 hrs? I did the David Chang wings and yeah the Super Bowl party was destroyed by them (omfg never had wings like this) but good lawd they took a lot of effort, spread over multiple days.


I invested in a Chargemap pass for my trip to France this summer. One card which works in nearly every French charger. Plug in, tap the card and it starts charging. Tap the card again to stop. That's it. Cost 20 euros for the card, and I think the rates are a little more than the native apps. But not enough to bother me. Highly recommended. You still have to deal with idle charges though.



Wait tree days before posting, span it out.


Lombok has come up a bit in this discussion. Are there any other popular Java libraries or frameworks that are affected?


Lombok is not affected by this, as it is not an annotation processor.

The most popular annotation processor that I've seen "in the wild" is the Hibernate Metamodel Generator (https://hibernate.org/orm/tooling/).

Also, Immutables (https://immutables.github.io/), my favorite Lombok alternative, is affected.

Of note, you can bypass this more-security-concious approach by just passing `-prof:full` to javac.


> Lombok is not affected by this, as it is not an annotation processor.

Lombok uses an annotation processor to bootstrap itself.


I know of these:

- Immutables - Autovalue - Mapstruct - Checker Framework

There's quite a list here https://github.com/gunnarmorling/awesome-annotation-processi... (Though I don't think Error Prone is actually an annotation processor, but rather a javac plugin.)

There's some irony in that Immutables and Autovalue are often named as alternatives for people that dislike Lombok's implementation but do like (some of) Lombok's features.


No other comes to mind. Most other libraries are proper annotation processors, meaning they abide by the rules and are only additive, generating new classes. One such would be mapstruct which is pretty frequently used.


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

Search: