I skimmed the article, but couldn’t spot any details on their estimates. They mention 70b+ params as being large in several places. But we’ve had several 100b+ param models that trail Sonnet.

Or maybe they think because their benchmarks are good they can ramp up the prices. Seems like they don’t have the market share to justify a move like that yet to me.

No one dog-fooded that thing.

I think the goal was to do a massive rewrite for Anthropic (they acquired bun) and show that rewriting projects from lang -> lang with Claude can reduce security vulnerabilities to help with the hype for an IPO.

I don’t use/know Rust so I can’t comment on the quality, but there was a public security review that found issues with the new Rust code: https://x.com/SwivalAgent/status/2054468328119279923

This is an interesting experiment but I’m skeptical of any claims of success by Jarred/Anthropic due to the incentive to hype agents. There’s probably a trillion dollars at stake with the IPO. And Anthropic seems to be developing this part of their business with Mythos and the super review features.

But I’d like to see the same experiment done on a project without so much relying on the story being success.

Have you happened to purchase anything in the past 12 months, and looked at the Fed's inflation numbers?

The counter-argument, and one that matches my experience is working at a lower level is actually beneficial for LLMs since they can see the whole picture and don’t have to guess at abstractions.

I think this is true regardless of what language you’re using.

I’ve built a lot in Zig and there’s no difference between vibing stuff in it versus TypeScript/React. Claude can “one-shot” them both, and will mimic existing code or grep the standard library to figure everything out.

It has lots of features, but I posted a demo of some fun with buttons here: https://x.com/rudedoggtweets/status/2043531378181161357

I think I’m building up an agentic IDE, just haven’t committed yet, but probably will this month.

One cool new thing I’m trying is running models directly w/ Vulkan. I’m about halfway there with my first model, but it’s going better/easier than I anticipated and I’m hoping I can make something very specialized and fast.

That’s my point.

One would expect the platform owner (especially one where they own both the hardware AND software) to provide a reasonable / easy path to using LLMs if they are going to provide a framework for doing so. But Apple can’t because of how slow they ship updates

You sure pay for the language complexity in high compile times though. Swift is slow, like really slow. I’ve been with it since like v1.2, and its been getting progressively worse for a while IMO. Complex language features (Lets do a borrow checker! Lets do embedded!) and half of the shit isn’t being used internally as far as I can tell

I get that it’s a ToS violation, but I’m saying it shouldn’t be. They’re trying to make the harness the moat because they all have no moat.

They are basically a utility.

I think this is built in to the latest Xcode IIRC

We all have different thresholds for what is acceptable, and our roles as engineers typically reflect that preference. I can grind on a single piece of code for hours, iterating over and over until I like the way it works, the parameter names, etc.

Other people do not see the value in that whatsoever, and something that works is good enough. We both are valuable in different ways.

Also, theres the pace of advancement of the models. Many people formed their opinions last year, and the landscape has changed a lot. There’s also some effort requires in honing your skill using them. The “default” output is average quality, but with some coaxing higher quality output is easily attained.

I’m happy people are skeptical though, there are a lot of things that do require deep thought, connecting ideas in new ways, etc., and LLMs aren’t good at that in my experience.