7 ms·
This is pretty exciting. I'm a copilot user at work, but also have access to Claude. I'm more inclined to use Claude for difficult coding problems or to review
by campbel 2y ago
This is pretty exciting. I'm a copilot user at work, but also have access to Claude. I'm more inclined to use Claude for difficult coding problems or to review my work as I've just grown more confident in its abilities over the last several months.
- ganoushoreilly 2y agoI too use Claude more frequently than OpenAi GPT4o. I think this is a two fold move for MS and I like it. Claude being more accurate / efficient for me says it's likely they see the same thing, win number 1. The second is with all the OpenAI drama MS has started to distance themselves over a souring relationship (allegedly). If so, this could be a smart move away tactfully. Either way, Claude is great so this is a net win for everyone.
- dartos 2y agoYeah, Claude consistently impresses me. A commenter on another thread mentioned it but it’s very similar to how search felt in the early 2000s. I ask it a question and get my answer. Sometimes it’s a little (or a lot) wrong or outdated, but at least I get something to tinker with.
- gonab 2y agoConversely I feel that the experience of searching has been degraded by a lot since 2016/17. My these is that, at this time, online spam increased by an order of magnitude
- TeaBrain 2y agoI don't think this is necessarily converse to what they said.
- bobthepanda 2y agoWinning the war against spam is an arms race. Spam hasn’t spent years targeting AI search yet.
- dageshi 2y agoI think it was the switch from desktop search traffic being dominant to mobile traffic being dominant, that switch happened around the end of 2016. Google used to prioritise big comprehensive articles on subjects for desktop users but mobile users just wanted quick answers, so that's what google prioritised as they became the biggest users. But also, per your point, I think those smaller simpler less comprehensive posts are easier to fake/spam than the larger more compreshensible posts that came before.
- state_less 2y agoOld style Google search is dead, folks just haven’t closed the casket yet. My index queries are down ~90%. In the future, we’ll look back at LLMs as a major turning point in how people retrieve and consume information.
- darepublic 2y agoI still prefer it over using llm. And I would be doubtful that llm search has major benefits over Google search imo
- ben_w 2y agoDepends what you want it for. Right now, I find each tool better at different things. If I can only describe what I want but don't know key words, LLM are the only solution. If I need citations, LLMs suck.
- esafak 2y agoAbstractive vs. extractive search.
- EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 2y agoIt's getting ridiculous. Half of the time now when I ask AI to search some information for me, it finds and summarizes some very long article obviously written by AI, and lacking any useful information.
- th0ma5 2y agoQueries were rewritten with BERT starting even before then so it's still the same generative model problem.
- imiric 2y agoI recently tried to ask these tools for help with using a popular library, and both GPT-4o and Claude 3.5 Sonnet gave highly misleading and unusable suggestions. They consistently hallucinated APIs that didn't exist, and would repeat the same wrong answers, ignoring my previous instructions. I spent upwards of 30 minutes repeating "now I get this error" to try to coax them in the right direction, but always ending up in a loop that got me nowhere. Some of the errors were really basic too, like referencing a variable that was never declared, etc. Finally, Claude made a tangential suggestion that made me look into using a different approach, but it was still faster to look into the official documentation than to keep asking it questions. GPT-4o was noticeably worse, and I quickly abandoned it. If this is the state of the art of coding LLMs, I really don't see why I should waste my time evaluating their confident sounding, but wrong, answers. It doesn't seem like much has improved in the past year or so, and at this point this seems like an inherent limitation of the architecture.
- geodel 2y agoWell it is volume business. <1% of advanced skill developers will find AI helper useless but for 99% of IT CRUD peddlers these tools are quite sufficient. All in all if employers cut down 15-20% of net development costs by reducing head counts, it will be very worthwhile for companies.
- WgaqPdNr7PGLGVW 2y agoI suspect it will go a different direction. Codebases are exploding in size. Feature development has slowed down. What might have been a carefully designed 100kloc codebase in 2018 is now a 500kloc ball of mud in 2024. Companies need many more developers to complete a decent sized feature than they needed in 2018.
- outworlder 2y agoIt's worse than that. Now the balls of mud are distributed. We get incredibly complex interactions between services which need a lot of infrastructure to enable them, that requires more observability, which requires more infrastructure...
- thelittleone 2y agoI'm the same, but had a lot of issues getting structured output from Anthropic. Ended up always writing response processors. Frustrated by how fragile that was, decided to try OpenAI structured outputs and it just worked and since they also have prompt caching now, it worked out very well for my use case. Anthropic's seems to have addressed the issue using pydantic but I haven't had a chance to test it yet. I pretty much use Anthropic for everything else.
- dangsux 2y ago[dead]
- JacobThreeThree 2y ago>The second is with all the OpenAI drama MS has started to distance themselves over a souring relationship (allegedly). If so, this could be a smart move away tactfully. I agree, this was a tactical move designed to give them leverage over OpenAI.
- a_wild_dandan 2y agoThe speed with which AI models are improving blows my mind. Humans quickly normalize technological progress, but it's staggering to reflect on our progress over just these two years.
- campbel 2y agoYes! I'm much more inclined to write one-off scripts for short manual tasks as I can usually get AI to get something useful very fast. For example, last week I worked with Claude to write a script to get a sense of how many PRs my company had that included comprehensive testing. This was borderline best done as a manual task previously, now I just ask Claude to write a short bash script that uses the GitHub CLI to do it and I've got a repeatable reliable process for pulling this information.
- unshavedyak 2y agoI rarely use LLMs for tasks but i love it for exploring spaces i would otherwise just ignore. Like writing some random bash script isn't difficult at all, but it's also so fiddly that i just don't care to do it. It's nice to just throw a bot at it and come back later. Loosely speaking. Still i find very little use from LLMs in this front, but they do come in handy randomly.
- unshavedyak 2y agoI wonder how long people will still protest in these threads that "It doesn't know anything! It's just an autocomplete parrot!" Because.. yea, it is. However.. it keeps expanding, it keeps getting more useful. Yea people and especially companies are using it for things which it has no business being involved in.. and despite that it keeps growing, it keeps progressing. I do find the "stochastic parrot" comments slowly dwindle in number and volume with each significant release, though. Still, i find it weirdly interesting to see a bunch of people be both right and "wrong" at the same time. They're completely right, and yet it's like they're also being proven wrong in the ways that matter. Very weird space we're living in.
- 2y ago
- pseudosavant 2y agoI use both Claude and ChatGPT/GPT-4o a lot. Claude, the model, definitely is 'better' than GPT-4o. But OpenAI provides a much more capable app in ChatGPT and an easier development platform. I would absolutely choose to use Claude as my model with ChatGPT if that happened (yes, I know it won't). ChatGPT as an app is just so far ahead: code interpreter, web search/fetch, fluid voice interaction, Custom GPTs, image generation, and memory. It isn't close. But Claude absolutely produces better code, only being beaten by ChatGPT because it can fetch data from the web to RAG enhance its knowledge of things like APIs. Claude's implementation of artifacts is very good though, and I'm sure that is what lead OpenAI to push out their buggy canvas feature.
- tanelpoder 2y agoAre there any good 3rd-party native frontend apps for Claude (on MacOS)? I mean something like ChatGPTs app, not an editor. I guess one option would be to just run Claude iPad app on MacOS.
- mike_hearn 2y agoYou can use https://recurse.chat/ https://recurse.chat/ if you have an Apple silicon Mac.
- greenavocado 2y agoOpen-WebUI doesn't support Claude natively (only through a series of hacks) but it is absolutely "THE" go-to for a ChatGPT Pro like experience (it is slightly better). https://github.com/open-webui/open-webui https://github.com/open-webui/open-webui
- TeMPOraL 2y agoIf you're willing to settle for a client-side only web frontend (i.e. talks directly with APIs of the models you use), TypingMind would work. It's paid, but it's good (see [0]), and I guess you could always go for the self-hosted version and wrap it in an Electron app - it's what most "native" apps are these days anyway (and LLM frontends in particular). -- [0] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41988306 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41988306
- szundi 2y agoSwitch to Cursor with Claude backend and 5x immediately
- mtkd 2y agoOne service is not really enough -- you need a few to triangulate more often than not, especially when it comes to code using latest versions of public APIs Phind is useful as you can switch between them -- but only get a handful of o1 and Opus a day which I burn through quick at moment on deeper things -- Phind-405b and 3.5 Sonnet are decent for general use