Or you're just upset for being caught off guard. LLMs have reduced our tolerance and attention span. You're welcome to rant about it but if there's a slim chance of overdose, it doesn't hurt to pause a bit at least. Your choice.
Your comment started strong. "30 years programming experience", asking interesting questions, I really hoped you'd say something profound... then it went down to whatever this is. The reason there are many programming languages and frameworks isn't programmer's preferences but rather their utility in solving specific problems. Take Prolog for example. Can you technically do what it does in JS? Yes. Can you do frontend in Prolog? Probably yes, but you wouldn’t [ab]use one tool when the other is due.
Your argument reads as someone who claims to be a professional but opens the toolbox and says: "do you know why there are so many tools?" And then goes to answer: "because I like it so"! What the ... ?
The audacity of skimming through and article and completely missing the point and coming to hackernews ranting about it. Respect the attention span, I guess.
Could you elaborate? I don't use Anthropic's products for ethical reasons. Honest question. And when you say it's "solved" do you think an engineer should have the same income as a non-engineer if their outcome is the same?
"AI can explain it to you but cannot understand it for you". Code is just a side-effect of reaching clarity. The reason these LLMs can emit any code at all is because they're not bound by the constraints of a compiler. That's until we create a feedback loop and force them to keep trying until syntax errors are gone. The next gate is tests. Loop till tests pass (including cheating of course, gotta keep your eyes open). Then there are the runtime errors, and then after all of that the developer gets to test the results and further refine what the specs missed or confused the model.
A couple of days building can really save us from a couple of hours of thinking.
Came here to give an answer but your last sentence kinda made the point I was gonna make. If one is legally in control, then one is accountable (the dog or unsafe toy example in reality is OpenAI's agents hacking huggingface for example).
The difference seems to be that some companies are above the law apparently.
I'm sure Opus 5.5 is smart and probably the next version gets even smarter. The main point of the article is accountability and that's not something we can delegate to AI.
Author here: thanks whoever shared this here. I love the brutal criticism and critical thinking of this community. I'm also fully aware of the emotions this stirs. If it makes you feel better, I'm not here to change anyone's workflow but I'm fed up with paying full price for degrading service. Just last week Github went down due to a stupid retrial error. We also had AI agents going rogue and hacking companies and governments. I use AI (specifically LLMs) every day since they came out 4 years ago. I also build AI-powered products. This is not about being anti-AI. I'm just fed up with slop being pushed as progress. Get your sh*t together. That's all.
If anyone has counter-arguments or cares to make me smarter, I'm all ears.
This is a free open source privacy first app that you can either run locally or as a Chrome Extension. There's so much data that you can practically reconstruct LinkedIn (profile, network, jobs, messages) and more (IP addresses, private contacts, etc)
One way or another local AI is the future. I actually find weaker models more interesting because it keeps me sharp (at the cost of velocity of course).
WTF is this?! Sattire? AI generated propaganda? I honestly don't get it. Can OP elaborate why it's a good content worthy of people’s time? Thanks in advance.
I like how the landing page (and even this HN page until this point) completely miss any reference to Meta and Facebook.
The landing page promises privacy but anyone who knows how FB used VPN software to spy on people, knows that as long as the current leadership is in place, we shouldn't assume they've all of a sudden became fans of our privacy.
IP is IP. LLM vendors are in legal battles with all sorts of IP owners. Putting it explicitly there (as awkward as it is) creates a legal obligation where the company or individual that fed it to "AI" cannot deny: "oh! I didn't know, therefore it's not stealing"
I don’t know. With the advent of AI-productivity tools (regardless of where we stand in how much the actual boost is), EMS should be able to offload part of their admin work and devs should be able to deliver more and faster. Long way to say that I'm skeptic if those numbers still apply in modern or near future environment.
The article describes insight on how to gain leverage. Regardless of promotion plans, it's good to have leverage in the current economy so your career doesn’t end prematurely when the company goes to cost-saving mode.
It's a common pitfall to measure what's easy. OTOH, the calculations can be quite arcade and hard to relate to. Many observability platforms have something in place but they leave more to be desired.
Service Levels can be quite simple at a high level but as soon as you start implementing them, the calculations can quickly become abstract and hard to understand.