llm/c92d54db-e3c8-419f-931f-0c3a686c0e4d/batch-2-0aa6aea2-ce4e-48e8-be29-54a5292a3a12-input.json
You are a comment classifier. Given a list of topics and a batch of comments, assign each comment to up to 3 of the most relevant topics.
TOPICS (use these 1-based indices):
1. AI productivity claims skepticism
2. Joy of coding vs results
3. Parent/manager time constraints
4. Vibe coding criticism
5. Web development complexity
6. Learning with AI assistance
7. Code review burden
8. Frontend framework criticism
9. Solo developer challenges
10. AI as skill crutch
11. Hobby project completion
12. Cost of AI tools
13. Pattern recognition experience
14. Management skills transfer
15. Identity crisis for developers
16. Local vs cloud AI models
17. Unnecessary toolchain complexity
18. Code quality concerns
19. Generalist vs specialist debate
20. Mental model building
COMMENTS TO CLASSIFY:
[
{
"id": "46490242",
"text": "I’ve noticed this too at work. If keep the change’s focused I can iterate far faster with ideas because it can type faster than I can."
}
,
{
"id": "46491312",
"text": "Yep, have seen this myself as previously a manager and now with a young family. I can make incredible progress on side-projects that I never would have started with only 2-4 hours carved out over the course of a week. There is a hopefully a Jevon's paradox here that we will have a bloom of side-projects, \"what-if\" / \"if only I had the time\" type projects come to fruition."
}
,
{
"id": "46491816",
"text": "This is exactly the case. Businesses in the past wouldn't automate some process because they couldn't afford to develop it. Now they can! Which frees up resources to tackle something else on the backlog. It's pretty exciting."
}
,
{
"id": "46490784",
"text": "I was very anti AI (mainly because I am scared that I'll take my job). I did a side project that would have took me weeks in just two days. I deployed it. It's there, waiting for customers now. I felt in love with the process to be honest. I complained my wife yesterday: \"my only problem now is that I don't have enough time and money to pay all the servers\", because it opened to me the opportunities to develop and deploy a lot of new ideas."
}
,
{
"id": "46491042",
"text": "Aren't you afraid it's gonna be a race to the bottom ? the software industry is now whoever pays gemini to deploy something prompted in a few days. Everybody can, so the market will be inundated by a lot of people, and usually this makes for a bad market (a few shiny one gets 90% of the share while the rest fight for breadcrumbs) I'm personally more afraid that stupid sales oriented will take my job instead of losing it to solid teams of dedicated expert that invested a lot of skills in making something on their own. it seems like value inversion"
}
,
{
"id": "46491374",
"text": "Yes, I worry about this quite a bit. Obviously nobody knows yet how it will shake out, but what I've been noticing so far is that brand recognition is becoming more important. This is obviously not a good thing for startup yokels like me, but it does provide an opportunity for quality and brand building. The initial creation and generation is indeed much easier now, but testing, identifying, and fixing bugs is still very much a process that takes some investment and effort, even when AI assisted. There is also considerable room for differentiation among user flows and the way people interact with the app. AI is not good at this yet, so the prompter needs to be able to identify and direct these efforts. I've also noticed in some of my projects, even ones shipped into production in a professional environment, there are lots of hard to fix and mostly annoying bugs that just aren't worth it, or that take so much research and debugging effort that we eventually gave up and accepted the down"
}
,
{
"id": "46493305",
"text": "I think everyone worries about this. No one knows how it's going to turn out, none of us have any control over it and there doesn't seem to be anything you can do to prepare ahead of time."
}
,
{
"id": "46491122",
"text": "Anything that can be done in 2 days now with an LLM was low hanging fruit to begin with."
}
,
{
"id": "46491177",
"text": "I really wonder what long term software engineering projects will become."
}
,
{
"id": "46493156",
"text": "‘Why were they long term?’ is what you need to ask. Code has become essentially free in relative terms, both in time and money domains. What stands out now is validation - LLMs aren’t oracles for better or worse, complex code still needs to be tested and this takes time and money, too. In projects where validation was a significant percentage of effort (which is every project developed by more than two teams) the speed up from LLM usage will be much less pronounced… until they figure out validation, too; and they just might with formal methods."
}
,
{
"id": "46493936",
"text": "some long term projects were due to the tons of details in source code, but some were due to inherent complexity and how to model something that works, no matter what the files content will be"
}
,
{
"id": "46491591",
"text": "anything nontrivial is still long term, nothing has changed"
}
,
{
"id": "46491916",
"text": "As a customer, I don't want to pay for vibe-coded products, because authors also don't have a time (and/or skills) to properly review, debug and fix products."
}
,
{
"id": "46491964",
"text": "> I felt in love with the process to be honest. I complained my wife yesterday: \"my only problem now is that I don't have enough time and money to pay all the servers\", because it opened to me the opportunities to develop and deploy a lot of new ideas. What opportunities? You aren't going to make any money with anything you vibe coded because, even the people you are targeting don't vibe code it, the minute you have even a risk of gaining traction someone else is going to vibe code it anyway . And even if that didn't happen you're just reducing the signal/noise ratio; good luck getting your genuinely good product out there when the masses are spammed by vibe-coded alternatives. When every individual can produce their own software, why do you think that the stuff produced by you is worth paying for?"
}
,
{
"id": "46493100",
"text": "That might be true, but it doesn't have to be immediately true. It's an arbitrage problem: seeing a gap, knowing you can apply this new tool to make a new entrant, making an offering at a price that works for you, and hoping others haven't found a cheaper way or won the market first. In other words, that's all business as usual. How does Glad sell plastic bags when there are thousands of other companies producing plastic bags, often for far, far less? Branding, contracts, quality, pricing -- just through running a business. No guarantee it's gonna work. Vibe-coding something isn't a guarantee the thing is shit. It can be fine. It still takes time and effort, too, but because it can take lot less time to get a \"working product\", maybe some unique insight the parent commenter had on a problem is what was suddenly worth their time. Will everyone else who has that insight and the vibe coding skills go right for that problem and compete? Maybe, but, also maybe not. If it's a money-maker, th"
}
,
{
"id": "46491081",
"text": "> AI assistance means you can get something useful done in half an hour, or even while you are doing other stuff. You don't need to carve out 2-4 hours to ramp up any more. That fits my experience with a chrome extension I created. Instead of having to read the docs, find example projects, etc, I was able to get a working version in less than a hour."
}
,
{
"id": "46492916",
"text": "I experienced the exact same thing: I needed a web tool, and as far as I could tell from recent reviews, the offerings in the chrome extension store seemed either a little suspicious or broken, so I made my own extension in a little under an hour. It used recent APIs and patterns that I didn't have to go read extensive docs for or do deep learning on. It has an acceptable test suite. The code was easy to read, and reasonable, and I know no one will ever flip it into ad-serving malware by surprise. A big thing is just that the idea of creating a non-trivial tool is suddenly a valid answer to the question. Previously, I know would have had to spend a bunch of time reading docs, finding examples, etc., let alone the inevitable farting around with a minor side-quest because something wasn't working, or rethinking+reworking some design decision that on the whole wasn't that important. Instead, something popped into existence, mostly worked, and I could review and tweak it. It's a little bit"
}
,
{
"id": "46494246",
"text": "Now we ALL be project managers! Hooray!"
}
,
{
"id": "46492406",
"text": "The good thing about AI is that it knows all the hundreds of little libraries that keep popping up every few days like a never-ending stream. No longer I need to worry about learning about this stuff, I can just ask the AI what libraries to use for something and it will bring up these dependencies and provide sample code to use them. I don't like AI for coding real algorithms, but I love the fact that I don't need to worry about the myriad of libraries that you had to keep up with until recently."
}
,
{
"id": "46492459",
"text": "what \"AI\" are you speaking of? all the current leading LLMs i know of will _not_ do this (i.e web search for latest libraries) unless you explicitely ask"
}
,
{
"id": "46493068",
"text": "Yes, people who were at best average engineers and those that atrophied at their skill through lack of practice seem to be the biggest AI fanboys in my social media. It's telling, isn't it?"
}
,
{
"id": "46488921",
"text": "Yes! I’ve seen this myself, folks moving back into development after years or decades."
}
,
{
"id": "46488976",
"text": "Only it’s a bit like me getting back into cooking because I described the dish I want to a trainee cook."
}
,
{
"id": "46489239",
"text": "Depends on how you're using the LLMs. It can also be like having someone else around to chop the onions, wash the pans and find the ingredients when you need them."
}
,
{
"id": "46489046",
"text": "The head chefs at most restaurants delegate the majority of details of dishes to their kitchen staff, then critique and refine."
}
,
{
"id": "46490599",
"text": "This approach seems to have worked out for both Warhol and Chihuly."
}
,
{
"id": "46489060",
"text": "As long as you get the dish you want when before you couldn’t have it — who cares?"
}
,
{
"id": "46489388",
"text": "Sure, as long as you don’t expect me to digest it, live with it, and crap it out for you, I see no problem with it."
}
,
{
"id": "46489414",
"text": "My expectations don’t change whether or not I’m using AI, and neither do my standards. Whether or not you use my software is up to you."
}
,
{
"id": "46490621",
"text": "So you're saying that if you go to any famous restaurant and the famous face of the restaurant isn't personally preparing your dinner with their hands and singular attention, you are disappointed. Got it."
}
,
{
"id": "46492580",
"text": "Are you even cooking if you did not collect your own ingredients and forge your own tools??"
}
,
{
"id": "46489126",
"text": "Flipping toggle switches went out of fashion many, many, many years ago. We've been describing to trainees (compilers) the dish we want for longer than most on HN have been alive."
}
,
{
"id": "46489333",
"text": "Actually, we’ve been formally declaring the logic of programs to compilers, which is something very different."
}
,
{
"id": "46489417",
"text": "(Replying to myself because hn) That’s not the only difference at all. A good use of an LLM might be to ask it what the difference between using an LLM and writing code for a compiler is."
}
,
{
"id": "46489428",
"text": "Equally a good use for a legacy compiler that compiles a legacy language. Granted, you are going to have to write a lot more boilerplate to see it function (that being the difference, after all), but the outcome will be the same either way. It's all just 1s and 0s at the end of the day."
}
,
{
"id": "46489500",
"text": "Sorry friend, if you can’t identify the important differences between a compiler and an LLM, either intentionally or unintentionally (I can’t tell), then I must question the value of whatever you have to say on the topic."
}
,
{
"id": "46492577",
"text": "The important difference is the reduction in boilerplate, which allows programs to be written with (often) significantly less code. Hence the time savings (and fun) spoken of in the original article. This isn't really a new phenomenon. Languages have been adding things like arrays and maps as builtins to reduce the boilerplate required around them. The modern languages of which we speak take that same idea to a whole new level, but such is the nature of evolution."
}
,
{
"id": "46489381",
"text": "The only difference is that newer languages have figured out how to remove a lot of the boilerplate."
}
,
{
"id": "46489073",
"text": "Isn't that still considered cooking? If I describe the dish I want, and someone else makes it for me, I was still the catalyst for that dish. It would not have existed without me. So yes, I did cook it."
}
,
{
"id": "46489231",
"text": "Work harder! Now I’m a life coach because I’m responsible for your promotion."
}
,
{
"id": "46492048",
"text": "Very apt analogy. I'm still waiting for my paycheck."
}
,
{
"id": "46490829",
"text": "I would argue that you technically did not cook it yourself - you are however responsible for having cooked it. You directed the cooking."
}
,
{
"id": "46489160",
"text": "> If I describe the dish I want, and someone else makes it for me, I was still the catalyst for that dish. It would not have existed without me. So yes, I did \"cook\" it. The person who actually cooked it cooked it. Being the \"catalyst\" doesn't make you the creator, nor does it mean you get to claim that you did the work. Otherwise you could say you \"cooked a meal\" every time you went to MacDonald's."
}
,
{
"id": "46489181",
"text": "Why is the head chef called the head chef, then? He doesn’t “cook”."
}
,
{
"id": "46489266",
"text": "The difference is that the head chef can cook very well and could do a better job of the dish than the trainee."
}
,
{
"id": "46489310",
"text": "\"head chef\" is a managerial position but yes often they can and do cook."
}
,
{
"id": "46489219",
"text": "To differentiate him from the \"cook\", which is what we call those who carry out the actual act of cooking."
}
,
{
"id": "46489236",
"text": "Well, don’t go around calling me a compiler!"
}
,
{
"id": "46489304",
"text": "If that's what you do, then the name is perfectly apt. Why shy away from what you are?"
}
,
{
"id": "46491075",
"text": "They're not moving back into development. They're adopting a new approach of producing software, which has nothing to do with the work that software developers do. It's likely that they \"left\" the field because they were more interested in other roles, which is fine. So now that we have tools that promise to offload the work a software developer does, there are more people interested in simply producing software, and skipping all of that \"busy work\". The idea that this is the same as software development is akin to thinking that assembling IKEA furniture makes you a carpenter."
}
]
Return ONLY a JSON array with this exact structure (no other text):
[
{
"id": "comment_id_1",
"topics": [
1,
3,
5
]
}
,
{
"id": "comment_id_2",
"topics": [
2
]
}
,
...
]
Rules:
- Each comment can have 0 to 3 topics
- Use 1-based topic indices
- Only assign topics that are genuinely relevant to the comment
- If no topics match, use an empty array:
{
"id": "...",
"topics": []
}
50