4 ms·

All my information about this is being based on feels, because debugging isn't really feasible. Verbose mode is a mess, and there's no alternative. It still do

All my information about this is being based on feels, because debugging isn't really feasible. Verbose mode is a mess, and there's no alternative. It still does what I need so I'm okay with it, but I'm also on the $20 plan so it's not that big of a worry for me. I did sense that the big wave of companies is hitting Anthropic's wallet. If you hadn't realized, a LOT of companies switched to Claude. No idea why, and this is coming from someone who loves Claude Code. Anyway, getting some transparency on this would be nice.

co_king_3 9mo ago
[flagged]
- snek_case 9mo ago
  LLMs are super efficient at generating boilerplate for lots of APIs, which is a time consuming and tedious part of programming.
  - cfiggers 9mo ago
    > They are aggressively manipulating social media with astroturfed accounts, in particular this site and Reddit.
  - co_king_3 9mo ago
    > LLMs are super efficient at generating boilerplate for lots of APIs Yes they are. This is true. > which is a time consuming and tedious part of programming. In my experience, this is a tedious part of programming which I do not spend very much time on. In my experience LLM generated API boilerplate is acceptable, yet still sloppier than anything I would write by hand. In my experience LLMs are quite bad at generating essentially every other type of code, especially if you are not generating JS/TS or HTML/CSS.
- cindyllm 9mo ago
  [dead]
- palebluedot 9mo ago
  > FWIW I think LLMs are a dead end for software development, and that the people who think otherwise are exceptionally gullible. By this do you mean there isn't much more room for future improvement, or that you feel it is not useful in its current form for software development? I think the latter is hard position to defend, speaking as a user of it. I am definitely more productive with it now, although I'm not sure I enjoy software development as much anymore (but that is a different topic)
  - co_king_3 9mo ago
    > By this do you mean there isn't much more room for future improvement I don't expect that LLM technology will improve in a way that makes it significantly better . I think the training pool is poisoned, and I suspect that the large AI labs have been cooking the benchmark data for years to suspect that their models are improving more quickly than they are in reality. That being said, I'm sure some company will figure out new strategies for deploying LLMs that will cause a significant improvement. But I don't expect that improvements are going to come from increased training. > [Do] you feel it is not useful in its current form for software development? IME using LLMs for software development corrodes my intuitive understanding of an enterprise codebase. Since the advent of LLMs, I've been asked to review many sloppy 500+/1000+ line spam PRs written by arrogant Kool-Aid drinking coworkers. If someone is convinced that Claude Code is AGI, they won't hesitate to drop a slop bomb on you. Basically I feel that coding using LLMs degrades my understanding of what I'm working on and enables coworkers to dominate my day with spam code review requests.
    - knodi 9mo ago
      This is a bot.
    - palebluedot 9mo ago
      > IME using LLMs for software development corrodes my intuitive understanding of an enterprise codebase. I feel you there, I definitely notice that. I find I can output high quality software with it (if I control the design and planning, and iterate), but I lack that intuitive feel I get about how it all works in practice. Especially noticeable when debugging; I have fewer "Oh! I bet I know what is going on!" eureka moments.
- taurath 9mo ago
  > FWIW I think LLMs are a dead end for software development, and that the people who think otherwise are exceptionally gullible. I think this takes away from the main thrust of your argument which is the marketing campaign and to me makes you seem conspiratorial minded. LLMs can be both useful and also mass astroturfing can be happening. Personally I have witnessed non coders (people who can code a little but have not done any professional software building) like my spouse do some pretty amazing things. So I don’t think it’s useless. It can be all of: 1. It’s useful for coding 2. There’s mass social media astroturfing happening 3. There’s a massive social overhype train that should be viewed skeptically 4. Theres some genuine word of mouth and developer demand to try the latest models out of curiosity, with some driven by the hype train and irrational exuberance and some by fear for their livelihoods.
  - co_king_3 9mo ago
    I'm not trying to be rhetorically effective, I'm stating my true belief IN MY GENUINELY HELD OPINION, LLMs generate shit code and the people who disagree don't know what good code looks like.
- CubsFan1060 9mo ago
  This has to be a bot account, right? 2 days old. Yesterday "I don't know about you, but I benefit so much from using Claude at work that I would gladly pay $1,500-$2,000 per month to keep using it."
  - burnte 9mo ago
    Agreed, those comments are all over the map, and 22 comments in 2 days!
  - burnte 9mo ago
    Agreed, those comments are all over the map, and so many comments in 2 days!
  - co_king_3 9mo ago
    Bots don't write like me
- arealaccount 9mo ago
  I notice and think about the astroturfing from time to time. It seems so gross. But I guess with all of the trillions of investor dollars being dumped into the businesses, it would be irresponsible to not run guerrilla PR campaigns
- ako 9mo ago
  I don’t understand how you can conclude that LLMs are a dead end: I’ve already seen so much useful software generated by LLMs, there’s no denying that they are a useful tool. They may not replace seniors developers, and they have their limitations, but it’s quite amazing what they already do achieve.
  - co_king_3 9mo ago
    Have you seen all the dogshit software generated by LLMs?
    - ako 9mo ago
      I also have seen lots of dogshit software created by Humans. And i have created useful software with LLMs. If you know how to manage the LLM, it can be very useful.
- verelo 9mo ago
  > FWIW I think LLMs are a dead end for software development Thanks for that, and it's worth nothing FYI. LLMs are probably the most impressive machine made in recorded human existence. Will there be a better machine? I'm 100% confident there will be, but this is without a doubt extremely valuable for a wide array of fields, including software development. Anyone claiming otherwise is just pretending at this point, maybe out of fear and/or hope, but it's a distorted view of reality.
taude 9mo ago
I can't watch a YouTube video without seeing a Claude ad. Same for friends. Safe for non-programmer friends.
- ReptileMan 9mo ago
  I can. I use brave
- sixtyj 9mo ago
  NFT moment :) Where did it end btw?
- pbasista 9mo ago
  The below remark is unrelated to the main topic of this thread. Why would you even watch a YouTube video with ads? There are ad blockers, sponsor segment blockers, etc. If you use them, it will block almost every kind of YouTube ad.
  - massysett 9mo ago
    I used to use ad blockers. One day I visited DistroWatch.com. The site deliberately tweaked its images so ad blockers would block some "good" images. It took me awhile to figure out what was going on. The site freely admitted what it was doing. The site's point was: you're looking at my site, which I provide for free, yet you block the thing that lets me pay for the site? I stopped using ad blockers after that. If a site has content worth paying for, I pay. If it is a horrible ad-infested hole, I don't visit it at all. Otherwise, I load ads. Which overall means I pay for more things and visit less crap things and just visit less things period. Which is good.
    - akdev1l 9mo ago
      Not safe, before even knowing if a site has the content you want you can be redirected to malware through ad networks not even joking
      - 9mo ago
minimaxir 9mo ago
> If you hadn't realized, a LOT of companies switched to Claude. No idea why, and this is coming from someone who loves Claude Code. It is entirely due to Opus 4.5 being an inflection point codingwise over previous LLMs. Most of the buzz there has been organic word of mouth due to how strong it is. Opus 4.5 is expensive to put it mildly, which makes Claude Code more compelling. But even now, token providers like Openrouter have Opus 4.5 as one of its most popular models despite the price.
- theappsecguy 9mo ago
  Everyone and I mean everyone keeps parroting this "inflection point" marketing hype, which is so damn tiring.
  - minimaxir 9mo ago
    Believe me, I wish it was just parroting. The real annoying thing about Opus 4.5 is that it's impossible to publicly say "Opus 4.5 is an order of magnitude better than coding LLMs released just months before it" without sounding like a AI hype booster clickbaiting, but it's the counterintuitive truth, to my personal frustration. I have been trying to break this damn model since its November release by giving it complex and seemingly impossible coding tasks but this asshole keeps doing them correctly. GPT-5.3-Codex has been the same relative to GPT-5.2-Codex, which just makes me even more frustrated.
    - viking123 9mo ago
      It still cannot solve a synchronization issue in my fairly simple online game, completely wrong analysis back to back and solutions that actually make the problem worse. Most training data is probably react slop so it struggles with this type of stuff. But I have to give it to Amodei and his goons in the media, their marketing is top notch. Fear-mongering targeted to normies about the model knowing it is being evaluated and other sort of preaching to the developers.
    - Denzel 9mo ago
      Weird, I broke Opus 4.5 pretty easily by giving some code, a build system, and integration tests that demonstrate the bug. CC confidently iterated until it discovered the issue. CC confidently communicated exactly what the bug was, a detailed step-by-step deep dive into all the sections of the code that contributed to it. CC confidently suggested a fix that it then implemented. CC declared victory after 10 minutes! The bug was still there. I’m willing to admit I might be “holding it wrong”. I’ve had some successes and failures. It’s all very impressive, but I still have yet to see how people are consistently getting CC to work for hours on end to produce good work. That still feels far fetched to me.
athrowaway3z 9mo ago
> and there's no alternative. Use the pi coding agent. Bare-bones context, easy to hack.

co_king_3 9mo ago

[flagged]

snek_case 9mo ago
LLMs are super efficient at generating boilerplate for lots of APIs, which is a time consuming and tedious part of programming.
- cfiggers 9mo ago
  > They are aggressively manipulating social media with astroturfed accounts, in particular this site and Reddit.
- co_king_3 9mo ago
  > LLMs are super efficient at generating boilerplate for lots of APIs Yes they are. This is true. > which is a time consuming and tedious part of programming. In my experience, this is a tedious part of programming which I do not spend very much time on. In my experience LLM generated API boilerplate is acceptable, yet still sloppier than anything I would write by hand. In my experience LLMs are quite bad at generating essentially every other type of code, especially if you are not generating JS/TS or HTML/CSS.
cindyllm 9mo ago
[dead]
palebluedot 9mo ago
> FWIW I think LLMs are a dead end for software development, and that the people who think otherwise are exceptionally gullible. By this do you mean there isn't much more room for future improvement, or that you feel it is not useful in its current form for software development? I think the latter is hard position to defend, speaking as a user of it. I am definitely more productive with it now, although I'm not sure I enjoy software development as much anymore (but that is a different topic)
- co_king_3 9mo ago
  > By this do you mean there isn't much more room for future improvement I don't expect that LLM technology will improve in a way that makes it significantly better . I think the training pool is poisoned, and I suspect that the large AI labs have been cooking the benchmark data for years to suspect that their models are improving more quickly than they are in reality. That being said, I'm sure some company will figure out new strategies for deploying LLMs that will cause a significant improvement. But I don't expect that improvements are going to come from increased training. > [Do] you feel it is not useful in its current form for software development? IME using LLMs for software development corrodes my intuitive understanding of an enterprise codebase. Since the advent of LLMs, I've been asked to review many sloppy 500+/1000+ line spam PRs written by arrogant Kool-Aid drinking coworkers. If someone is convinced that Claude Code is AGI, they won't hesitate to drop a slop bomb on you. Basically I feel that coding using LLMs degrades my understanding of what I'm working on and enables coworkers to dominate my day with spam code review requests.
  - knodi 9mo ago
    This is a bot.
  - palebluedot 9mo ago
    > IME using LLMs for software development corrodes my intuitive understanding of an enterprise codebase. I feel you there, I definitely notice that. I find I can output high quality software with it (if I control the design and planning, and iterate), but I lack that intuitive feel I get about how it all works in practice. Especially noticeable when debugging; I have fewer "Oh! I bet I know what is going on!" eureka moments.
taurath 9mo ago
> FWIW I think LLMs are a dead end for software development, and that the people who think otherwise are exceptionally gullible. I think this takes away from the main thrust of your argument which is the marketing campaign and to me makes you seem conspiratorial minded. LLMs can be both useful and also mass astroturfing can be happening. Personally I have witnessed non coders (people who can code a little but have not done any professional software building) like my spouse do some pretty amazing things. So I don’t think it’s useless. It can be all of: 1. It’s useful for coding 2. There’s mass social media astroturfing happening 3. There’s a massive social overhype train that should be viewed skeptically 4. Theres some genuine word of mouth and developer demand to try the latest models out of curiosity, with some driven by the hype train and irrational exuberance and some by fear for their livelihoods.
- co_king_3 9mo ago
  I'm not trying to be rhetorically effective, I'm stating my true belief IN MY GENUINELY HELD OPINION, LLMs generate shit code and the people who disagree don't know what good code looks like.
CubsFan1060 9mo ago
This has to be a bot account, right? 2 days old. Yesterday "I don't know about you, but I benefit so much from using Claude at work that I would gladly pay $1,500-$2,000 per month to keep using it."
- burnte 9mo ago
  Agreed, those comments are all over the map, and 22 comments in 2 days!
- burnte 9mo ago
  Agreed, those comments are all over the map, and so many comments in 2 days!
- co_king_3 9mo ago
  Bots don't write like me
arealaccount 9mo ago
I notice and think about the astroturfing from time to time. It seems so gross. But I guess with all of the trillions of investor dollars being dumped into the businesses, it would be irresponsible to not run guerrilla PR campaigns
ako 9mo ago
I don’t understand how you can conclude that LLMs are a dead end: I’ve already seen so much useful software generated by LLMs, there’s no denying that they are a useful tool. They may not replace seniors developers, and they have their limitations, but it’s quite amazing what they already do achieve.
- co_king_3 9mo ago
  Have you seen all the dogshit software generated by LLMs?
  - ako 9mo ago
    I also have seen lots of dogshit software created by Humans. And i have created useful software with LLMs. If you know how to manage the LLM, it can be very useful.
verelo 9mo ago
> FWIW I think LLMs are a dead end for software development Thanks for that, and it's worth nothing FYI. LLMs are probably the most impressive machine made in recorded human existence. Will there be a better machine? I'm 100% confident there will be, but this is without a doubt extremely valuable for a wide array of fields, including software development. Anyone claiming otherwise is just pretending at this point, maybe out of fear and/or hope, but it's a distorted view of reality.

taude 9mo ago

I can't watch a YouTube video without seeing a Claude ad. Same for friends. Safe for non-programmer friends.

ReptileMan 9mo ago
I can. I use brave
sixtyj 9mo ago
NFT moment :) Where did it end btw?
pbasista 9mo ago
The below remark is unrelated to the main topic of this thread. Why would you even watch a YouTube video with ads? There are ad blockers, sponsor segment blockers, etc. If you use them, it will block almost every kind of YouTube ad.
- massysett 9mo ago
  I used to use ad blockers. One day I visited DistroWatch.com. The site deliberately tweaked its images so ad blockers would block some "good" images. It took me awhile to figure out what was going on. The site freely admitted what it was doing. The site's point was: you're looking at my site, which I provide for free, yet you block the thing that lets me pay for the site? I stopped using ad blockers after that. If a site has content worth paying for, I pay. If it is a horrible ad-infested hole, I don't visit it at all. Otherwise, I load ads. Which overall means I pay for more things and visit less crap things and just visit less things period. Which is good.
  - akdev1l 9mo ago
    Not safe, before even knowing if a site has the content you want you can be redirected to malware through ad networks not even joking
    - 9mo ago

minimaxir 9mo ago

> If you hadn't realized, a LOT of companies switched to Claude. No idea why, and this is coming from someone who loves Claude Code. It is entirely due to Opus 4.5 being an inflection point codingwise over previous LLMs. Most of the buzz there has been organic word of mouth due to how strong it is. Opus 4.5 is expensive to put it mildly, which makes Claude Code more compelling. But even now, token providers like Openrouter have Opus 4.5 as one of its most popular models despite the price.

theappsecguy 9mo ago
Everyone and I mean everyone keeps parroting this "inflection point" marketing hype, which is so damn tiring.
- minimaxir 9mo ago
  Believe me, I wish it was just parroting. The real annoying thing about Opus 4.5 is that it's impossible to publicly say "Opus 4.5 is an order of magnitude better than coding LLMs released just months before it" without sounding like a AI hype booster clickbaiting, but it's the counterintuitive truth, to my personal frustration. I have been trying to break this damn model since its November release by giving it complex and seemingly impossible coding tasks but this asshole keeps doing them correctly. GPT-5.3-Codex has been the same relative to GPT-5.2-Codex, which just makes me even more frustrated.
  - viking123 9mo ago
    It still cannot solve a synchronization issue in my fairly simple online game, completely wrong analysis back to back and solutions that actually make the problem worse. Most training data is probably react slop so it struggles with this type of stuff. But I have to give it to Amodei and his goons in the media, their marketing is top notch. Fear-mongering targeted to normies about the model knowing it is being evaluated and other sort of preaching to the developers.
  - Denzel 9mo ago
    Weird, I broke Opus 4.5 pretty easily by giving some code, a build system, and integration tests that demonstrate the bug. CC confidently iterated until it discovered the issue. CC confidently communicated exactly what the bug was, a detailed step-by-step deep dive into all the sections of the code that contributed to it. CC confidently suggested a fix that it then implemented. CC declared victory after 10 minutes! The bug was still there. I’m willing to admit I might be “holding it wrong”. I’ve had some successes and failures. It’s all very impressive, but I still have yet to see how people are consistently getting CC to work for hours on end to produce good work. That still feels far fetched to me.

athrowaway3z 9mo ago

> and there's no alternative. Use the pi coding agent. Bare-bones context, easy to hack.