My growing cynicism

[richmond62]

. . . about HOW things are promoted, and HOW inconvenient ideas are not mention.

Was reading:
-

Screenshot 2024-12-03 at 9.49.57.png (75.59 KiB) Viewed 1476 times

-
"In the early stages of building a startup, speed, efficiency, and resourcefulness are crucial. You need to validate your idea as quickly as possible while keeping expenses to a minimum. That’s where no-code platforms come in—a solution that lets you build software without extensive programming knowledge or the need to hire external developers. Here’s why no-code might be your startup’s ultimate advantage:"

Emphasis is mine.

Every time I read or hear 'no-code' I automatically think of HyperStudio.

One of the great things about HyperStudio 5 is that you can download a fully functional 5-card version for free:

https://www.mackiev.com/hyperstudio/

[which is more than can be said for at least one product I have in mind]

AND, HyperStudio 5 is 100% no-code: all the coding that one could do in HyperStudio 4.5 has gone completely.

The result is effectively a toy by comparison with HyperStudio 4.5 as you are far, far more constrained in terms of what you can do.

"1. Rapid Prototyping and MVP Development

Launching quickly is crucial, and no-code platforms like ZZZZZZZZ XXXXXX let you create functional prototypes or minimum viable products (MVPs) in days instead of months. This allows startups to test ideas, gather feedback, pivot if needed and iterate faster than ever."

Name of product obscured by me: as this should NOT be seen as any form of attack on any particular product or firm: it should be seen as what I realise is a dangerous tendency.

I agree 100% that a no-code platform can be used to create functional prototypes.

I am not so convinced that a no-code platform can be used to create minimal viable products.

* HOWEVER: I should like to point out that I produced a functional prototype/MVP using Runtime Revolution 2.1 in 2003: and spent 3 months of
coding to do that: to produce features that a no-code solution could NOT have produced.

If a no-code platform is being promoted as something for rapid prototype development, and only that: while it may seem a good thing, my problem as the boss of a company hiring someone to develop more that a rapid prototype development is going to go a bit like this:

1. Are you expecting me to pay the licensing fees for the rapid prototype development?

and then

2. Pay the licensing fees for the RAD that you are going to use to develop the real thing?

Because any 'real thing' will, almost inevitably, involve quite a bit of coding/programming that would not be possible with a no-code suite.

I can run up any number of jazzy rapid prototypes with HyperStudio: but at that point I am stuck as I will have to transfer (i.e. re-do) everything to some other development tool.

So, why should I take the time and trouble to use a no-code solution for rapid prototype development knowing what comes next?

Now, take OXT for instance (as the direct, linear descendent of Runtime Revolution 2.1 by the way): I can run up almost 100% no-code prototypes which I can THEN develop into fully-functional systems staying inwith OXT.

Oh, and before I forget: NO licensing fees whatsoever.

---

Ah, AND "Why No-Code Platforms Are a Game-Changer for Startups" . . .

1. Software development is NOT a game.

[Mind you this brings to mind a company involved in software development whose employees always finish their messages with 'have fun': this is just symptomatic of what I would like to call the "no-code, no-effort, no-quality" school of almost everything that seems to have a grip on very many people's minds.]

Brain Rot

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2n2r695nzo

I would also ask whither any startup that only is capable of using some no-code solution, and I feel that there is a likelihood that a lot of those startups will not stay the length, and will end up as "Finishdowns" fairly quickly.

----

Were someone to produce a RAD that contained a large number of built-in routines to do the more pedestrian donkey work for you, but still
allowed you access to code then that might not be a bad thing: but then they would not be banging on about 'no-code' to the extent that readers would get the impression (if they were naive) that just by sitting in front of a computer wiggling a mouse EVERYTHING would just fall together like some swami doing a jigsaw puzzle by chanting mantras.
-

Screenshot 2024-12-03 at 10.35.09.png (441.92 KiB) Viewed 1475 times

{A.I. generated nonsense]

[tperry2x]

Were someone to produce a RAD that contained a large number of built-in routines to do the more pedestrian donkey work for you, but still allowed you access to code then that might not be a bad thing

That was kind of my thinking with this option, (Preferences > Dictionary):
(Add scripts to new objects when created via the tools palette)

Of course, you can still edit the scripts afterwards, just that it should take the donkey work out of remembering - "how do I script that particular control again"?

as-close-to-no-code-as-I-go.png (54.45 KiB) Viewed 1470 times

Having checked out the recent no-code and ai generated offerings, you still have to go back over everything as it frequently makes mistakes. Mistakes that a high school student would not be making, or at least would be able to rectify. It also suffers from short term memory loss - where you ask it to do something initially, you then add a few extra requirements, and it'll drop the first or perhaps second requirement you originally asked for.

So I don't think the 'hype-train' around AI has fully pulled into the station yet. It's still doing the rounds and gathering momentum. That would be okay if it gets to the level of which it could be trusted as a proper assistant (co-pilot seems nothing more than a Microsoft surveillance tool when it comes to coding) - and it too suffers from the short term memory loss problem that all AI algorithms seem to.

[richmond62]

A.I. cannot think: the whole thing looks like an extremely sophisticated parrot.

A.I. has no morals.

[I'll pop into Broadmoor for advice on how to deal with semi-toxic relatives, and we'll see where that gets me.]

A.I. cannot fact check.

So, Yes, A.I. to make:

Digests of Whackypedia articles.

Produce pictures of people with 3 legs.

Yes.

But for reliable anything: forget it.

Just the other day I tried conversing with Claude 3.5 in Scots . . .

I noticed 2 things:

1. A lot of English-language content.

2. Throwing my Scots nouns back at me, but misapplied.

Claude 3.5 claims to function in 100 languages: but that is obvious nonsense.

What does seem to be the case it that it uses interlocutors like myself to train.

The best way to test this is to feed it several non-existent words and see how it responds.

Our brains/minds have either evolved over millions of years, or a deity went 'crash-bang-wallop': the hubris of humans thinking the can produce something that complicated in, say, 20 years is both farcical and sad, and illustrative of just how badly wrong humanity has gone in terms of horrible materialism.

Lorenzo de Medici would be puking in his boots!

[OpenXTalkPaul]

That was kind of my thinking with this option, (Preferences > Dictionary):
(Add scripts to new objects when created via the tools palette)

That was my thinking too when I added a few scripts to the IDE's 'default scripts' folder. Those don't get automatically added to new objects. but they are available to click-to-insert from the handler list, lower half, on the left side of the script-editor window. Maybe they could be fused togethrer.

I wouldn't mind having Object/Image Library modified to be like a palette. I've used that to save pre-scripts objects for later reuse.

HyperCard had 'Ready-Made Buttons' and 'Ready Made Stacks' that you could use like templates.

I wouldn't mind block-coding VPL metaphor as long as you could get at the underlying code when you need to.