alt Hacker NewsI'm not an AI "advocate". I'm telling y'all about how the world is. How it's going to be. I'm not happy about it, but we've crossed the threshold beyond which it's incomprehensibly silly not to factor the massive changes LLMs bring into how you work designing or implementing software. Lisp apps are cool, but as of 2026 they're fading into irrelevance. The paradigm of programming they represent is bound for the Computer History Museum and Usagi Electric's YouTube channel—not the reality of new software development. Even a legacy code base can be poured into an LLM, which will grok it instantly, answer your questions about it, and propose changes and improvements that will make it more performant, reliable, and comprehensible. I know this because I've done it.
Replies
Well done you.
Catch all the security holes while you were reviewing it, or did you leave those to the machine as well?
I don't agree. That may be your experience, but it is annoying to have someone act as a prophet for all things and disregard what everyone else says. Emacs is still relevant in my daily work even with heavy use of LLMs.
> Even a legacy code base can be poured into an LLM
Which LLM can read a whole code base? Embeddings do not count.
> I'm not an AI "advocate". I'm telling y'all about how the world is. How it's going to be.
This, together with grand claims that obviously don't hold up in reality, does make you an AI advocate no matter how much you dislike the label.
If you comment was more measured and had nuanced view, then I'd understand wanting to push back on it. But then you also say stuff like "Even a legacy code base can be poured into an LLM, which will grok it instantly" so no wonder others see you as a AI advocate.