741–750 of 921 posts
I’m sure the new model is a step above the old one but I can’t be the only person who’s getting tired of hearing about how every new iteration is going to spell doom/be a paradigm shift/change the entire tech industry etc. I would honestly go so far as to say the overhype is detrimental to actual measured adoption.
I’ve lost trust in anything they say. The fear marketing is clearly intentional at this point.
I’m sure the new model is a step above the old one but I can’t be the only person who’s getting tired of hearing about how every new iteration is going to spell doom/be a paradigm shift/change the entire tech industry etc. I would honestly go so far as to say the overhype is detrimental to actual measured adoption.
3 months later, you are an absolute idiot to still be using that useless model. Are you not using glasswing 2-01 high? Oh, yeah, glasswing from 3 months ago is absolutely worthless, every viber knows, it's your fault for holding it wrong.
For once you should not get too excited for new models release and words and adjectives promising things. Honestly it's your fault humanity lost its humanity and we just have words words words and mass schizophrenia
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I feel like there’s a bunch of factors for why it will never be the same for many folks, from the models and harnesses, to the domains and existing tests/tooling. If the argument is “you have to use the right model, harness, test and tooling for it to work” then it’s not replacing software engineers any time soon. The other thing is - where are all the web apps, mobile apps, games, desktop apps, from these 100x pro…
I wouldn't paint the image in such black terms. LLMs can be good in finding bugs and potential issues. And if you like, they can be like IntelliSense on steroids. Even agentic workflows can be good, e.g. for an initial assessment of a new large codebase. And potentially millions of other small tasks like writing one-off helper scripts etc.
[0] https://arstechnica.com/ai/2026/03/after-outages-amazon-to-m...
I’m sure the new model is a step above the old one but I can’t be the only person who’s getting tired of hearing about how every new iteration is going to spell doom/be a paradigm shift/change the entire tech industry etc. I would honestly go so far as to say the overhype is detrimental to actual measured adoption.
Remember how Sam spent like a year talking about how scary close GPT-5 was to AGI and then when it did finally come out... it was kinda meh.
I’m sure the new model is a step above the old one but I can’t be the only person who’s getting tired of hearing about how every new iteration is going to spell doom/be a paradigm shift/change the entire tech industry etc. I would honestly go so far as to say the overhype is detrimental to actual measured adoption.
> how every new iteration is going to spell doom/be a paradigm shift/change the entire tech industry etc. It's much the dynamic between parents and a child. The child, with limited hindsight, almost zero insight and no ability to forecast, is annoyed by their parents. Nothing bad ever happens! Why won't parents stop being so worried all the time and make a fuss over nothing? The parents, which the child somewhat star…
This is two parents disagreeing on whether their child will automatically grow up to be a psychopath with one parent constantly remarking “if you teach that child how to cut bread, they will stab everyone later. If you teach that child to drive, they will run over everyone later”, not the “parents know better” situation you describe.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since when did corporations care? Most seem to just pay their insurance premium for cyber liability and call it a day.
There is a difference between leaking user accounts and passwords and getting your business destroyed overnight entirely. Imagine if an AI can infiltrate your SaaS database and delete your entire database and every single backup. The business is dead immediately.
Now, its very possible that this is Anthropic marketing puffery, but even if it is half true it still represents an incredible advancement in hunting vulnerabilities. It will be interesting to see where this goes. If its actually this good, and Apple and Google apply it to their mobile OS codebases, it could wipe out the commercial spyware industry, forcing them to rely more on hacking humans rather than hacking mobi…
The interesting selling point about this, if the claims are substantial, is that nobody will be able to produce secure software without access to one of these models. Good for them $$$ ^^
There is a huge gap between the shining examples and actual use case: What is the false positive rate? How to judge false positive? If you need 1000 run that cost 20000 USD to find a vulnerability, and you need 2000 USD to generate a exploit (which makes it self-verifiable to be not false positive), than your cost is not 22000 USD but 1000x2000+2000 which is 2 million USD: you have to try generating exploit for every…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Every time I mention this I feel like there’s a bunch of factors for why it will never be the same for many folks, from the models and harnesses, to the domains and existing tests/tooling. I feel bad for the people for whom it doesn’t work, but Claude Opus has written most of my code in 2026 so far. I had to build some tools around linting entire projects and most of my tokens are probably referencing existing stuf…
> I feel like there’s a bunch of factors for why it will never be the same for many folks, from the models and harnesses, to the domains and existing tests/tooling. If the argument is “you have to use the right model, harness, test and tooling for it to work” then it’s not replacing software engineers any time soon. The other thing is - where are all the web apps, mobile apps, games, desktop apps, from these 100x pro…
My company for example has gotten 500% better at creating productivity tools.