u/lelanthran

I wouldn’t do anything genuinely illegal to my own child, so i’m not gonna do it to my step child.

Disciplining your own child is not illegal, disciplining someone else's child is. At that point, it's not preference anymore.

I do realise that maybe my assumption was exaggerated by random social media posts and stuff, it seemed to me like dating someone with a child was an actual issue in and of itself and i was just not aware of it, but the comments prove to me that it’s just a matter of preference,

When there's legal hurdles to treating the child like your own, it's no longer preference.

Why ask the question if you are going to dismiss all the answers?

It appears that what is appearing on your screen is not what I am typing into my keyboard.

Let me try again:

To rephrase my question I’d go:”if all else considered you’d date someone, but the only thing is that they have a child, not involved with their ex in any way, maybe they dated for 3 years, the father ran away after discovering pregnancy, or whatever happened in their relationship and somehow their not together and there’s no co-parenting happening, just purely a single mother, what then is the issue?”

The issue, copied from my previous comment, is:

IOW, you get all of the responsibility for whatever that kid does with no power to discipline.

And further, there is no such thing as "Dad will never come back", because, in SA, you legally can't stop the dad being involved. Sure, maybe at the time you meet the single mother dad is happy to be out of the picture, but that doesn't mean it's going to stay that way.

The problem you are ignoring is that, dating someone with a child has additional issues vs dating a childless person.

When you date someone with a child, they come with all the standard baggage that childless people come with, and then they have additional baggage. You asked for the reasons why people avoid dating single parents, but you are dismissing all the reasons given as "oh, it's just personal preference".

How?

Are you under the impression that you can discipline someone else's kid?

Read my other post - you can't even raise your voice at them.

I mean, sure, I can shout at my nephews all day long when they get up to shit with my sons (and my brother will probably join me in shouting at them), but that's not the same thing as shouting at a kid whose father will use even the smallest issue to get back at the mother, to remove custody, etc.

Why are you dismissing all the answers you are given? Why ask the question if you are going to dismiss the answers?

It’s only the ‘alpha male’ morons who speak negatively about single moms.

They were directly asked the question. You'd prefer they don't answer?

Not asking for approval but an understanding of the sentiment against dating single parents.

You've been given multiple reasons multiple times, and you dismissed each reason like it is irrelevant.

Why ask the question if you don't want to hear the answers?

if they break something i deal with them the same way i would deal with my own child

You cannot. You are legally prevented from doing so.

It's not your kid. IOW, you get all of the responsibility for whatever that kid does with no power to discipline.

If my own kid steps out of line (steals from a teacher, hits someone, whatever), I can quickly nip it in the bud and I have a wide range of options open to me to nip it in the bud.

With someone else's kid, there's nothing you can do, but open your wallet each time it happens. If you so much as raise your voice at the kid, their dad is going to go apeshit and their mum is quickly going to follow with a similar reaciton of her own once she realises that she can lose custody because she dated someone that shouted at the kid.

What's worse (and I have seen this many times), is that the kid will very quickly realise that you have no power to enforce any rules.

Rather than find all this out after getting emotionally attached to kid and mother, best to just move on, which is what most guys do.

I don't normally reply in this subreddit (long-time reader, though, I'm not an expert, just have an interest in homebuilding), but...

No one has any individuality anymore. Why does every house look like this now

What exactly do you find unaesthetic here?

• All the windows match,
• All the walls/siding match,
• The primary mass is clear and symmetrical,
• The secondary mass is clear, also symmetrical,
• The roofline is clean and clear,
• The first floor of the primary mass, due to the porch roof, is visually supporting the second floor of the primary mass,
• The dormer is a little larger than it should be in proportion to the roof, but not so much that it'd spoil the appearance (I can see that it was done to have consistent windows, so this is a nitpick, not something that spoils the appearance)
• The colors are appropriate to the style,
• Single roof pattern (gable with cross-gable dormer) with expected exception for porch,
• Front door is easily identifiable, using slightly larger gap between pillars to draw attention,
• Gables style (the two inner angles at the tips, not sure what they are called) match on dormer with the main house,

There's honestly nothing to change here to improve the looks. This is basically the template for "building a good-looking house" - no 3 different roof styles with a cut-off nub lost somewhere in a roofline with all the refinement of a turbulent sea, sitting atop a number of secondary masses with no primary mass in sight, with 5 different sidings. I don't see 4x different styles of windows, all at different sizes and levels. I don't see pretentious arches or columns mismatched to the style of the house.

There's literally nothing here to complain about other than "it's too perfect, we need to break up the symmetry somehow", which isn't a complaint.

This is an ad for a paid service with a clickbait title. Keep scrolling.

Well, poster's username checks out :-/

If you've got a Claude subscription, why do you even need a sailing expert anymore?

Well, that was my original point, was it not? What value can I (or you) add to someone wanting software for this specific example?

Pre-AI, the value I added was extremely clear: I can examine the problem domain, I can tease out the requirements from the client, I can map the problem domain to software and deployment concepts, I can map the problem domain data to persistent storage, and, eventually, actually create the software.

I am seeing ad-hoc products created for the extremely long tail where the user and a Claude subscription does every single one of those steps.

Now, you may make the argument that the client's time is valuable, and sure, that is correct, and they will hire someone to do it. However (and this is the important part), the skill-barrier to doing all of that can be cleared by a high-school dropout, because all they are is a proxy between the client and Claude.

The type of jobs done by HS dropouts - how high do you think that pay goes? Do you think you can reasonably compete with someone charging below minimum wage?

did 1-hour less work because

The complaint was not having enough status to report.

You think that doing an hour less in a day results in not having any status to report?

You're implying that a stand-up is the team scrutinizing each other's work.

No, I'm saying that they self-police each other.

That's only true at the most bottom of the barrel scraping level.

You haven't been around much.

a UI for ordering custom sailboat sails, taking into account things such as location, intended use, local conditions, materials available locally, etc.

That doesn't sound like stuff that can't be handled by a sailing expert and a Claude subscription.

If you can't get enough done in a couple of hours to report a status update, that's on you dude.

Who said that? Specifically, why do you think that "can't get 2 hours of work done in an 8 hour day" was the complaint?

Where did you read that?

But you just said anyone can vibe code photoshop.

What's this? Selective amnesia?

I said:

vibe a tool that does what they use Photoshop or Aseprite for

That, to you, means that they vibed a 100% Photoshop replacement? Is excessive LLM usage having an effect on your ability to read?

So where is that vibe coded partial photoshop replacement?

Are you seriously claiming to have not seen this? https://getartcraft.com/ (There's like 7 or so "replacements" in there)

The dev has been spamming it everywhere, reddit included. What's even more hilarious is that he's charging for it (a pointless endeavour that only seems to happen to AI-bros who think that they have value in the SDLC other than as beta-testers).

And some of the other photoshop replacements I've seen cover like 20% of the functionality, actually work and aren't being sold, just given away.

And that's just with less than a year of agentic coding. This trend is clear. We have no value left, and the owners of capital will replace us.

If you can vibe code photoshop, why are people still buying photoshop?

Because it's still early days.

Because it can't be delivered by the end-user themselves.

Serious question: How long do you expect this to continue being true?

They can certainly try though...

They already do; I've seen several non-programmers (artists, actually) already vibe a tool that does what they use Photoshop or Aseprite for.

I've got a PM at my current place who vibed together an entire replacement for Jira reporting, which his team has been using now for months. I've seen an MD of a small company using swarms of agents to create a new product for a different industry, and then manage to sell the damn thing.

WhateverTF you think is your special value that is added to the product, I can assure you that it won't be the case much longer.

Why don't you give us an example of that "the important stuff" that you can focus on now that everything is done by AI?

That's possible one outcome, certainly.

For another possible outcome, read "Pump 6", or perhaps "The Machine Stops".

License: MIT (but it's all vibe-coded so who really knows who owns it?)

LMAO :-)

My issue is, we know deleting huge swathes of code and redoing it is normally the fastest route, that was true pre AI and remains true for AI code.

Every line of code added to a product is a liability. We trade-off the liability against the gains in adding it.

Pre-AI, we used the natural friction in adding lines of code to ensure that the trade-off was made. Now we appear to have decided that adding lines of code is not adding liability, and that there's only gains, so we go ahead and add as many lines of code as we can.

Unfortunately, they will be responsible, but neither empowered nor capable.

All of the responsibility if it blows up, with none of the power to prevent that blow up, nor, eventually, any skill necessary to prevent that blow-up.

And yet, devs, themselves, are rushing into it.

No we didn't, that was management trying to be "agile" because it sounds good.

It wasn't all management; scrum managed to get the devs to police each other. Standups became a way to get devs to micromange themselves. I lost count of the number of times developers here defended this saying it allows them to see who is not pulling their weight.

Remember how it was prior to daily standups in a never-ending sequence of sprinting? Your manager would monitor your performance, and if you slipped on some days and did 1-hour less work because you were chatting at the watercooler, then made coffee twice, then exceeded lunch by 15m, etc, they did not notice and if they did they did not care either.

With the move to daily standups, devs themselves would police each other, with a gradual movement of average hours worked trending towards the workaholics who did unpaid overtime every day because they did not have anything else to do.

You can go back in this subreddit's history, and you'll see it expressed time and again, whenever the topic of agile or scrum or standups came up.

Management played a part, but devs were literally the ones who started this movement, and in all the places I have been at, they were the ones who championed it.

actually do the important stuff

My point is that "the important stuff" is a prompt away, so exactly what satisfaction are you going to get from delivering something that, for all practical purposes, can be delivered by the end-user themselves anyway?