9 ms·
Offtopic - The success of coding agents must be Ed Zitron's nightmare. He has been a perpetual bear
by returnInfinity 7mo ago
Offtopic - The success of coding agents must be Ed Zitron's nightmare.
He has been a perpetual bear
- Lariscus 7mo agoWhich success? I still see those things churning out laughably wrong code at every turn.
- delaminator 7mo agoI guess everyone stopped using Claude Code already then, if it doesn't work.
- coldtea 7mo agoIt doesn't work precisely because people are using claude. If it worked, there'd be no people using it.
- simianwords 7mo ago[flagged]
- danielbln 7mo ago[flagged]
- ubercore 7mo agoIt's not a point and click code machine, but it's laughably wrong to say they just churn out laughably wrong code.
- noosphr 7mo agoHalf of developers are below average. Half of developers say that the code Ai produces is amazing. Would you like a venn diagram?
- dash2 7mo agoYou’re saying that AI is already good enough to replace 50% of developers. Sounds like you agree it will be very important.
- rwmj 7mo agoHe's saying the good half of developers have to deal with the increased slop output of the bad half. Probably will be overwhelmed by it, in the end.
- ludicrousdispla 7mo ago
- cleaning 7mo agoYou're telling on yourself here
- vv_ 7mo agoHave they been successful?
- simianwords 7mo agoSome one should compile concrete predictions that he made vs how they turned out.
- Kye 7mo agoHe hedges so much that it's probably impossible to catch him in a contradiction or missed prediction. It must be all that practice running a PR firm for AI companies.
- simianwords 7mo agoits not that hard really >You can fight with me on semantics, on claiming valuations are high and how many users ChatGPT has, but look at the products and tell me any of this is really the future. Imagine if they’d done something else. Imagine if they’d done anything else. Imagine if they’d have decided to unite around something other than the idea that they needed to continue growing. Imagine, because right now that’s the closest you’re going to fucking get. This is what he said. Clearly wrong in spirit.
- zero_shift 7mo agoI don't think so. His argument is not "this tech doesn't work", but rather "these businesses aren't economically viable" And that the smoke and mirrors accounting and perpetual thirst for more billions indicates just how unviable it is Whilst he does dunk on LLM capabilities, the framing is the business angle - can Anysphere etc. actually form a moat and make a profit?
- simianwords 7mo ago>His argument has never been "this tech doesn't work", but rather "these businesses aren't economically viable" Why? because of cost?
- zero_shift 7mo agoCost, debt, difficulty forming a moat, gap between what the product promises and what it can do, and the difficulty actually raising capital required. His style is acerbic and (imo) excessive sometimes. But he's also one of a minority of journos actually looking at the numbers and adding them up. Which seems to be a rarity
- hiddencost 7mo agoDisagree. He's cherry picking an extremely limited subset of numbers, based on a weak understanding of the industry and a lack of access to a lot of private data, and taking advantage of vulnerable people.
- zero_shift 7mo agoI'm not sure how anyone can respond to that, without asking you to divulge that private data
- danlitt 7mo ago>taking advantage of vulnerable people What on earth do you mean by this? Who is getting taken advantage of?
- luke-stanley 7mo agoThis is not off-topic at all!
- jaredcwhite 7mo ago"Success" is a very relative statement in this context.