Gary Marcus

Rank 12 of 47
|
Score 83
5/18/2025, 9:50:49 PM
X
In reply to:
Jarle Stabell 馃挋
@jarlestabell
路
251d
@GaryMarcus @martin_casado His conclusion may be correct, but he is totally wrong about some of the tools he mentions. As an example, a major DAW (Digital Audio Workstation) was written using Borland Delphi.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
路
252d
@martin_casado Calling Judah stupid is stupid. And every new system creates new abstractions. So I don鈥檛 really even understand your argument.

His key point is really that these kinds of systems introduce technical debt and other problems that naive users can鈥檛 fix.

That is surely true of
martin_casado
@martin_casado
路
252d
While I agree in part with Judah's conclusion, his comparison makes no sense.

Low code platforms are easier to use because they provide higher level abstractions. But in doing so they necessarily create platform specific interfaces, tend to create walled gardens (e.g. Flash)

The statement expresses skepticism about the ability of someone without software development experience to create a competitor to established DAWs using 'vibe coding.' It suggests a willingness to revise views if proven wrong, indicating openness to new evidence.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm and is open to revising views based on new evidence, aligning with the principle of doing no harm.聽[+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by expressing a willingness to change views if proven wrong, fostering a constructive dialogue.聽[+1]
  3. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in constructive criticism by challenging the feasibility of 'vibe coding' without personal attacks.聽[+1]