Hacker News Reader

Comment by input_sh | Hacker News Reader

And those mediocre engineers put their work online, as do top-tier developers. In fact, I would say that the scale is likely tilted towards mediocre engineers putting more stuff online than really good ones.

So statistically speaking, when the "AI" consumes all of that as its training data and returns the most likely answer when prompted, what percentage of developers will it be better than?

View on HN

These people also prefer plastic averaged-out images of AI girls to real ones.

The Average is their top-tier.

That's not how modern LLMs are built. The days of dumping everything on the internet into the training data and crossing your fingers are long past.

Anthropic and OpenAI spent most of 2025 focusing almost expensively on improving the coding abilities of their models, through reinforcement learning combined with additional expert curation of training data.

Silly old me, how could've I forgotten about such drastic improvements between say Sonnet 3.7 and Sonnet 4.6. It's 500x better now!

Thank you for teaching me, AI understander. You're definitely not detached from reality one bit. It's me, obviously.

Have you seen how many people are talking about the November 2025 inflection point, where the models ticked over from being good at running coding agents to being really good at it?

In other words, there's probably a market for a model trained on a curated collection of high-quality code.

Doubt it”s sustainable. These big models keep improving at a fast pace and any progress like this made in a niche would likely get caught up to very quickly.

That is what we have today - it's why Opus 4.5+ and GPT-5.2+ are so much better at driving coding agents than previous models were.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com