Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

You’re very confused i think.

Adding more people to a project doesn’t improve throughout - past a certain point. Communication and coordination overhead (between humans) is the limiting factor. This has been well known in the industry for decades.

Additionally, i’d much rather hire someone that worked on a a handful of projects, but actually _wrote_ a lot of the code, maintained the project after shipping it for a couple years, and has stories about what worked and didn’t, and why. Especially a candidate that worked on a “legacy” project. That type of candidate will be much more knowledgeable and able to more effectively steer an AI agent in the best direction. Taking various trade offs into account. It’s all too easy to just ship something and move on in our industry.

Brownie points if they made key architecture decisions and if they worked on a large scale system.

Claude building something for you isn’t “learning” in my opinion. That’s like saying I can study for a math exam by watching a movie about someone solving math problems. Experience doesn’t work like that. You can definitely learn with AI but it’s a slow process, much like learning the old fashioned way.

Maybe “experience” means different things to us…

 help



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

Search: