That's exactly how I read it. It seems like tribalism - "this thing/person is bad, and we can use whatever bad words we want to describe them that we want, because the only thing that matters is aligning people for or against me and what I see as bad".

>> this post gets me irrationally irritated and makes me want to shake you and shout

Did you read the rest of the comment? The rest of it is civil. It's normal for people to start by saying something like "this makes me frustrated" as a preface to indicate their feelings, and then not actually act frustrated and instead calmly work through their thoughts. That is a meatspace social convention (not just an online one) - are you not aware of it?

> However, if you were to call my work 'slop'

And, as previously established, if you use AI, it's not your work.

> and say that I'm either inexperienced or that I'm an 'over-invested-in-AI engineer' we would be having a problem on a personal level

...and those are still criticisms of your work, not yourself.

The actual problem here is that you are taking offense to things that are not offensive, not that the parent poster was being uncivil. Thinking that calling someone "inexperienced" is a personal insult is absolutely insane. That's a wildly miscalibrated sense of how social dynamics work and what it actually means to insult someone.

> if one cannot express themselves civilly

It was neither unhinged nor uncivil. Maybe you responded to the wrong comment by accident?

> they have permission to insult someone's competence and work

If it's AI, it's not your work. And even if it was - criticism of your work is not a personal insult. This criticism is flatly invalid.

The only caveats: I didn't play around with Qwen 3.7 Max very much, and of course these models are far cheaper than Opus.

But any suggestion that Deepseek approaches Opus in terms of quality/intelligence immediately makes me suspect propaganda - it's that noticeable of a difference.

(and a different person will do a similar sampling technique but come away with the opposite conclusion, that HN is super pro-AI)

This is why neglecting statistics in favor of vibes is a bad idea.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48035600

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48035860

After things begin to settle down, we'll probably see a consolidation of both frontier and open-source models - and then OpenRouter will become less useful, because that 5% overhead is well worth it when you want to try 20 models from 10 labs, but harder to stomach when you only need 5 models from 2 providers, and each of those providers has its own API knobs that you can tune to make things even cheaper.

If a company being purchased by PE meant that they lost the vast majority of their customers as soon as contractually possible, then the possible value extracted by PE would drop off a cliff.

This isn't necessarily the fault of the customers - we're all dealing with a lot of information to process.

And, up until recently, it was reasonable to attach reputation to brand instead of to owners.

And I think that's a lot of what PE exploits - the gap between people's belief about a brand's reliability/reputation, and the fact that the actual reliability has been a function of who the actual owners of the company are for many years - but people are still attached to the old mental model.

(there may also be some value for PE to extract from assets aside from customer relationships and the higher-order "brand value", but I suspect that that's secondary - if I'm wrong please correct me)

https://cursor.com/evals

(that is, different places on the Pareto efficiency graph)

"To solve this problem, I engineered an entire system from scratch."

Response: "That's a cool solution. But, isn't it a lot more work than this straightforward solution?" (the user is right - the complicated solution is massively more work than the straightforward one)

Response: "Yes, but it's a cool project - it's OK to not be the most efficient all the time." (also right - there's nothing wrong with doing projects with zero utility just for the fun of it, and this one actually does have some use)

It seems like there's a bifurcation of expectations.

Some people want to do a project, and they take a thin justification as an excuse to do so.

Other people really do want to solve a problem, but they get mired in perfectionism and overengineering, or aren't even aware of the simpler solution.

Conflation between these two categories keeps many HN threads gainfully employed.

(worth noting that for people in the latter category, pointing out "there's this simpler solution" can be incredibly helpful, because they simply might not know that it exists, or maybe they need a little bit of pushing to realize that they're overengineering things and that they got stuck in a place that they don't actually want to be in. this has been me, many many times)

I wouldn't be surprised if programmers had, collectively, written more game engines than actual games.

Installation of embedded agents into a handful of companies (at most) out of the millions in the country is categorically different than overt and widespread installation of party members into high-ranking roles in hundreds/thousands of companies.

Claiming that these are remotely comparable is either pure ignorance or blatant propaganda. Any sane person can see that these aren't in the same universe of things.

Let me know when you're out of your loop (this is the third time your LLM has responded with "Have a great day" or "good bye" without stopping) and actually read the comments you're replying to and turn on your brain to reply.

Or don't - if anyone in the future comes to read this thread, your comments will completely destroy any shred of inclination they might have to believing your points.

Yet another self-discrediting post for all HN to see. By all means, continue.