Comment by njoyablpnting | Hacker News Reader

Comment by njoyablpnting | Hacker News Reader

> I tell the AI what I want, walk away from my computer for four hours, and come back to find the work done. Done well, done better than I would have done it myself, with no corrections needed.

I use Opus 4.6 all day long and this is not my experience at all. Maybe if you're writing standard CRUD apps or other projects well-represented in the training data. Anyone who has written "real" software knows that it's lots of iterating, ambiguity and shifting/opposing requirements.

The article seems to be written in order to feed into some combination of hype/anxiety. If the author wants to make a more compelling case for their stance I would suggest they build and deploy some of this software they're supposedly getting the LLM to perfectly create.

Yes, it's a very useful tool, but these sort of technically-light puff pieces are pretty tiresome and reflect poorly on the people who author and promote them. Also, didn't this guy previously make up some benchmarks that turned out to be bogus? https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1fd75nm/out_of_...

I went down a bit of a rabbit-hole trying to figure out exactly who Matt Shumer is and why anyone should care what he thinks. The best information I found came from this article, which was from before he pivoted to being an AI startup bro:

https://www.newsweek.com/i-couldnt-play-rules-so-i-became-en...

It's kind of a sad read. He would benefit a lot from getting outside the startup bubble and talking to some people who do useful work for a living instead of riding internet fads and growthmaxxing via viral social media posts.

I put it through its paces and 4.6 is actually a downgrade from 4.5 in terms of communication and steerability. I went back to 4.5.

> I use Opus 4.6 all day long and this is not my experience at all.

It's not the experience of anyone who uses AI. People have put these AI through freshman level college CS courses and the results weren't impressive at all.

> these sort of technically-light puff pieces are pretty tiresome and reflect poorly on the people who author and promote them.

These people tend to be invested heavily in AI. That's the commonality tying them all together - AI grift. They'll say anything for more money.

So for AI appears to be a useful tool that requires a bit of hand holding. Nothing more. Maybe things will change and AGI is right around the corner.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com