4 ms·

You can't tell us that LLM's aren't ready for prime time in 2025 after you tried Copilot twice last year. New better models are coming out almost daily now and

You can't tell us that LLM's aren't ready for prime time in 2025 after you tried Copilot twice last year. New better models are coming out almost daily now and it's almost common knowledge that Copilot was and is one of the worst. Especially right now, it doesn't even come close to what better models have to offer. Also the way to use them is to ask for small chunks of code or questions about code after you gave them tons of context (like in Claude projects for example). "Not ready for prime time" is also just factually incorrect. It is already being used A LOT. To the point that there are rumors that Cursor is buying so much compute from Anthropic that they are making their product unstable, because nvidia can't supply them hardware fast enough.

KeplerBoy 2y ago
Copilot isn't a single model. Copilot is merely a brand and uses openAI and anthropics newest models.
consp 2y ago
> It is already being used A LOT Which is an argument for quality why? Bad coders are not going to produce better code that way. Just more with less effort.
- bboygravity 2y ago
  The claim of the comment I replied to was "LLM's are not ready for prime time" and my opinion is that LLM prime time is already here. Using LLM's to code (or to learn how to code) is obviously super popular. Who's talking about quality anyway? Code quality is not and was never the number one most important thing in business, popularity of a product/service or keeping a job. You may find that unfortunate (I agree), but it's just how it is based on my own 15yr+ experience.
59nadir 2y ago
I stopped using AI for code a little over a year ago and at that point I'd used Copilot for 8-12 months. I tried Cursor out a couple of weeks ago for very small autocomplete snippets and it was about the same or slightly worse than Copilot, in my opinion. The integration with the editor was neat but the quality of the suggestions were no different than what I'd had with Copilot much earlier, and the pathological cases where it just spun off into some useless corner of its behavior (recommending code that was already in the very same file, recommending code that didn't make any sense, etc.) seemed to happen more than with Copilot. This was a ridiculously simple project for it to work on, to be clear, just a parser for a language I started working on, and the general structure was already there for it to work with when I started trying Cursor out. From prior experience I know the base is pretty easy to work with for people who aren't even familiar with it (or even parsing in general), so I think given the difficulties that Cursor had even putting together pretty basic things it might be that a user of Cursor would see minimal gains in velocity and end up having less understanding in the medium to long term, at least in this particular case.
- IanCal 2y ago
  The cursor auto complete? It's useful but the big thing is using sonnet with it.
  - 59nadir 2y ago
    I tried it with Claude Sonnet 3.5 or whatever the name is, both tab-completed snippets and chat (to see what the workflow was like and to see if it gave access to something special).

KeplerBoy 2y ago

Copilot isn't a single model. Copilot is merely a brand and uses openAI and anthropics newest models.

consp 2y ago

> It is already being used A LOT Which is an argument for quality why? Bad coders are not going to produce better code that way. Just more with less effort.

bboygravity 2y ago
The claim of the comment I replied to was "LLM's are not ready for prime time" and my opinion is that LLM prime time is already here. Using LLM's to code (or to learn how to code) is obviously super popular. Who's talking about quality anyway? Code quality is not and was never the number one most important thing in business, popularity of a product/service or keeping a job. You may find that unfortunate (I agree), but it's just how it is based on my own 15yr+ experience.

59nadir 2y ago

I stopped using AI for code a little over a year ago and at that point I'd used Copilot for 8-12 months. I tried Cursor out a couple of weeks ago for very small autocomplete snippets and it was about the same or slightly worse than Copilot, in my opinion. The integration with the editor was neat but the quality of the suggestions were no different than what I'd had with Copilot much earlier, and the pathological cases where it just spun off into some useless corner of its behavior (recommending code that was already in the very same file, recommending code that didn't make any sense, etc.) seemed to happen more than with Copilot. This was a ridiculously simple project for it to work on, to be clear, just a parser for a language I started working on, and the general structure was already there for it to work with when I started trying Cursor out. From prior experience I know the base is pretty easy to work with for people who aren't even familiar with it (or even parsing in general), so I think given the difficulties that Cursor had even putting together pretty basic things it might be that a user of Cursor would see minimal gains in velocity and end up having less understanding in the medium to long term, at least in this particular case.

IanCal 2y ago
The cursor auto complete? It's useful but the big thing is using sonnet with it.
- 59nadir 2y ago
  I tried it with Claude Sonnet 3.5 or whatever the name is, both tab-completed snippets and chat (to see what the workflow was like and to see if it gave access to something special).