alt Hacker News> The idea of making personal single user software is a fantasy, an oxymoron, you MAKE software? there's the presumption that it will be used for other people, otherwise you'd be USING software.
It definitely isn't. I've done it (successfully) a few times.
> The idea of an assistant that can use natural language is nice! But why would you MAKE software with it, it IS software, just do the thing you want to do!
This makes no sense to me. Are you suggesting that instead of using an LLM to make, say, an ebook reader or crossword app that meets my personal needs, I should invoke an LLM every time I want to read a book or do a crossword? That feels like a strawman, but I can't work out what else you might be arguing here.
> I should invoke an LLM every time I want to read a book or do a crossword.
Well no, I'd say, use any of the existing 100 book readers to read a book, or any of 50 crossword apps.
But if you want to use an LLM to customize it the exact way you want it. Yes, use the LLM every time you want to do it. Wanting the LLM to do a previous gen app and then get out of the way sounds like asking for faster horses. Just tell the LLM you want to play a crossword game with X and Y rules, then give it a name so you can play it again in the future if you want, and if you want to try out rule Z, you do that, a la Kay's Dynabook.
That may sound weird to you, but asking an LLM to 'make software like we used to' sounds weird to me, and seeing "invoking an LLM every time I want to do X" as weird sounds like something that's true only for a very brief period of time where something is so uncommon that it's inference is expensive.