We are nowhere near this scenario tbh. Token cost is very high and is currently heavily subsidized by VC money to gain market share. Also this realistically only applies to small projects, small codebases and mostly greenfield ones. No way you can rewrite the whole codebase quickly and cheaply in any mid-sized+ projects

But even assuming token cost plummets, any non-trivial piece of software that is valuable enough to generate income for the company is also big, complex, interconnected enough that cannot be rewritten quickly even by AI, also for business reasons too. If a piece of code works, is stable and is tested, then rewriting it will always bring a high degree of risk and uncertainty that in a lot of business critical applications is just not worth it. A stable system can stay untouched for years besides minor dependencies updates.

Also, I think the $200/mo plan is subsidized by VC money and is likely hemorrhaging money for Anthropic, so it's not really meaningful to reason around that.

It's based on existing GitHub PRs and Issues, the full dataset is on HuggingFace and is one year old now. All frontier models 100% have those issues and PRs in their training data so obviously they are good at reproducing fixes for them when confronted with the same codebase and similar requests. Am I missing something? How is this considered the most reliable benchmark?

Some senior people that were in the AI pilot, have been using this for a while, and are very into it claimed that it can open PRs autonomously with minimum input or supervision (with a ton of MD files and skills in repos with clear architecture standards). I couldn't replicate this yet.

I'm objectively happy to have access to this tool, it feels like a cheat code sometimes. I can research things in the codebase so fast, or update tests and glue code so quickly that my life is objectively better. If the change is small or a simple bugfix it can truly do it autonomously quicker than me. It does make me lazier though, sometimes it's just easier to fire up claude than to focus and do it by myself.

I'm careful to not overuse it mostly to not reach the montlhy cap, so that I can "keep it" if something urgent or complex comes my way. Also I still like to do things by hand just because I still want to learn and maintain my skills. I feel that I'm not learning anything by using claude, that's a real thing.

In the end I feel it's a powerful tool that is here to stay and I would be upset if I wouldn't have access to it anymore, it's very good. I recently subscribed to it and use it on my free time just because it's a very fun technology to play with. But it's a tool. I'm paid because I take responsability that my work will be delivered on time, working, tested, with code on par with the org quality standards. If I do it by hand or with claude is irrelevant. If i can do it faster it will likely mean I will receive more work to do. Somebody still has to operate Claude and it's not going to be non-technical people for sure.

I genuinely think that if anyone still believes today that this technology is only hype or a slop machine, they are in denial or haven't tried to use a recent frontier model with the correct setup (mostly giving the agent a way to autonomously validate it's changes).

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47333831

Points: 3

# Comments: 0

It seems to me many infosec best practices that have been built over decades have been forgot in the last few months like nothing happened. People really do give this kind of software full system access, plus access to their emails, their private chats, most likely their passwords too and who knows what else via plugins. I couldn't really imagine this happening one year ago.

I'm 100% confident that any state actor and cybercrime groups are currently heavily focusing their research on these tools. You compromise the right person and you can access all kind of critical information, it would basically be the same as having some remote control software on their system with full permissions.

And everyone on the hype train seems to be absolutely unaware of this. Maybe I'm missing something, but all of this feels so odd to me.

Another interesting nuance of the law in Germany is: it's almost always illegal to take pictures or video of people that show their suffering or struggle. You cannot take a video of a man having a mental breakdown for example. Is this universal? No, of course a journalist will take a picture of a suffering man in the cold to send a message about inequality. If he ever will be sued it will be the judge to decide if in this specific instance the right of the individual or the right of the collective right should prevail.

You know, they are adults and have free will and do want a smartphone like everyone else to use Whatsapp, read the news, search things on Google, etc.

Hell, my 95 year old grandma convinced a nurse to install TikTok on her phone because she saw her using it and also wanted to try it. It's not like we can isolate them from the world

The manufacturer might access it, Apple states they don't, Google and Samsung I'm not sure. A bad actor with 0days might too.

This is one of the cases in which giving them an iPhone with its walled garden has great benefits. You can also setup parental control on top of that already locked down ecosystem.

Also consider that most Magic cards are also valuable only because of their collector status. The valuable ones are mint first editions and nobody is buying them to play them.

So who fuels this collectors market? Nostalgic 30-something that have now disposable income and want to buy things they wanted as children. Same as with videogames collectors and such. You don't need an original copy of Supermario to play it, but people still spend thousands to buy it.

Hasn't this gate been open since Chrome conquered the browser market years ago?

My hypothesis is that developers work on different things and while these models might work very well for some domains (react components?) they will fail quickly in others (embedded?). So one one side we have developers working on X (LLM good at it) claiming that it will revolutionize development forever and the other side we have developers working on Y (LLM bad at it) claiming that it's just a fad.

I seriously don't understand this (common) complaint that I see. If anything a slight tilt makes the screen a bit more readable.