Hacker News Reader

It could also be covert advertising like you see in reddit

trust your instinct. internet is dead.

Actually, there are more internet users today than at any point in history. The internet is far from dead.

The commenter in question is the CTO of the company which makes Wordfence. My instinct says they're not on the OpenAI payroll and you're looking at a normal comment and not advertisement.

I think you should check your priors man; it's worth thinking critically before you toss out accusations like that.

Thanks joenot443.

I suspect the only way to prove that I’m legit to the doubters is to do something a paid shill or a bot would never ever do.

To the commenters who think I’m a shill or bot: fuck every single one of you and the various motherfucking horses you rode in on.

I suspect we may be entering a dystopia where vulgarity is proof of life.

> fuck every single one of you and the various motherfucking horses you rode in on.

Maybe you're an LLM trained on 4chan

lol - touche. Although I suspect that would have been far worse had that been the case.

I actually think people on 4chan and even reddit don’t get angry that quickly because it’s an anonymous posting board so there’s nothing to be defensive about, unless you’re really invested on an opinion, which makes me suspect this even more, why would he start cursing when he was just bragging about spending 70k?

It I posted on reddit about how I just spent 70k on a watch and someone replied that they didn’t trust me, maybe I would laugh or reply with “whatever”, but never would I reply in anger.

Maybe you wouldn’t, but something the past few years have made abundantly clear is that that having more money is not correlated to having a thicker skin and being able to ignore criticism. Or if it is, it’s an inverse correlation.

It's probably the same sort of sanity that prevents you from spending 70k on Cla— on a watch, and prevents you from replying in anger.

If it payed, shills and bots would use every slur under the sun without a shred of hesitation.

aw, my horse.

sorry this triggered you, i regret post what i posted, as i didn't expect it would really upset any hn user, but it did to you, so I'm sorry.

also i was referring to broadly the phenomenon not your post, e.g. even your post is from real human, it's the replies and upvotes push your post to the top.

i don't expect to convince you, but if there's anything I can do to un-upset you, I'd happy to try. :)

I would agree with you, but mmaunder has a registration date of 2007 and has a bio filled out with easily-verifiable information.

...is what a reasonable argument against would sound like. But in truth, nobody really knows who is running that account. There's nothing stopping anybody from passing off their HN account to someone else, having it stolen from them, or even selling it. They could possibly even be who they say they are, but have an undisclosed vested interest in the thing they're promoting.

Internet communities aren't dead, but social media sure is, and Hacker News is ultimately a social media site.

People just aren't used to how LLMs and their tools are developed

Depending on the time of the year you can expect fresh updates from any given company on how their new models and tools perform and they'll generally blow the competition out of the water.

The trick is to either realize that your current tools will just become magically better in a few months OR lean in and switch companies as their tools and models update.

I think it's just a function of the models getting better. One is the best and then next month another overtakes it as so on.

> “this LLM tool I’m using now is the real deal".

GPT-5 is not the final deal, but it's incredibly good as is at coding.

Anecdotal, but it's something completely else in terms of capabilities, ignore it at your own peril, but I think it will profoundly change software development.

> ignore it at your own peril

I’m not arguing for ignoring it, my point is different.

> but I think it will profoundly change software development.

The point is that this is said every time, together with “the previous thing to which the exact same praise was given, wasn’t it”. So it’s several rounds of “yes yes, the previous time the criticisms were right, but this time it’s different, trust me”. So everyone else is justified in being skeptical.

No one wants AI to have the problems it has (technical, ethical, and others). If they didn’t it would be better for everyone. Criticism is a way of surfacing issues so they can be fixed.

And sure, I’ll grant that some people want to bash the other side more than they want to arrive at the truth, but those exist in all sides of the argument (probably in roughly equal measure?). So to have a productive conversation we need to go in with the mindset of “we’re on the same side in the goal of not having this suck”.

So what is your thesis? The tools keep getting better, so that’s some kind of gotcha that the emporer has no clothes? Some people prefer the absolute latest and greatest so people on the previous gen were all fakers making Pelican svgs?

Maybe the productive thing is actually to ignore naysayers and goalpost movers and use the tools.

You aren’t enlightened for not liking a tool. “Oh, hammers? Absolutely a bubble, after all they never fixed the hit-your-thumb issue i blogged about, and nail guns just let you hurt your thumbs faster”

No, that is not my thesis, and nowhere in my post do I talk about a dislike for a particular tool or “being enlightened”.

I’ll say it again:

> So to have a productive conversation we need to go in with the mindset of “we’re on the same side in the goal of not having this suck”.

If you’re unwilling to engage in those terms and steel man the argument, I don’t see the point in engaging in conversation. If what you want is to straw man and throw unsubstantiated jabs at someone, there are other communities better suited for that.

> So it’s several rounds of “yes yes, the previous time the criticisms were right, but this time it’s different, trust me”. So everyone else is justified in being skeptical.

True, but even the boy who cried wolf too many times eventually got his sheep eaten by the wolf.

I have my own personal anecdotal benchmarks and I never hyped LLMs before GPT-5.

Things that simply did not work before GPT-5 no matter how many shots I gave them, GPT-5 breezed through.

For me, it would take at least 2 generations of no felt progress in the models to call for diminishing returns, and I'm not seeing them.

oh it's anecdata? then I don't care. show me evidence please

From my experience this mostly happened to Antrophic models, and not because of some honeymoon period, but after the introduction of their models, the model quality and the limits are starting to decline.

Many people are complaning about this on HN and Reddit. I do not have any proof, but there is a pattern, I suppose Antrophic first attracts customers, then starts to optimize costs/margins.

> Many people are complaning about this on HN and Reddit. I do not have any proof, but there is a pattern, I suppose Antrophic first attracts customers, then starts to optimize costs/margins.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enshittification

Another way to look at it is it's very cut throat. Switching costs are low for now, by design. The ways to get you locked in haven't been developed.

Results > memes.

If we ship more for less because the new agent doesn't tap out, that's not a honeymoon, it's an upgrade.

"If", indeed. That's the problem of metrics: it depends on what you measure, and sometimes it's hard to get a meaningful answer in the short term.

If you ship more for less, but less maintainable or less correct, then it's not necessarily an upgrade. Always the same question: does it benefit the developer? The product? The company?

It was already possible, without AI, to look like one is doing a great job ("they are producing so much! Let's promote them!") but actually just building a bad codebase. The art being to get the promotion and move to the next step before the project implodes.

Not saying that AI necessarily ends up doing that, but it most certainly help.

Because there is no switching cost, it's easy to switch, just change the API and be done

With CLI tools like Claude code and codex cli there is some friction due to the change in user experience ie keyboard shortcuts, commands etc