Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Coding with LLMs in the summer of 2025 – an update

antirez.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 434 posts

Re: Coding with LLMs in the summer of 2025 – an update

#121

Post by cafp12 »

mirekrusin wrote: post #117
cafp12 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO It's not unlike all other "dev" tools we use at all. There are tons of free and open tools that usually lag a bit behind the paid versions. People pay for jetbrains, for mac os, and even to search the web (google ads). You have very powerful open weight models, they are not the cutting edge. Even those you can't really run locally, so you'd have to pay a 3rd party to run it. Also the competition is awesome to see…

You don't pay for macOS, you pay for apple device, operating system is free.

Thanks captain missing the point

Re: Coding with LLMs in the summer of 2025 – an update

#122

Post by roywiggins »

nojito wrote: post #119
roywiggins wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Claude Code was released in May .

Yup. But they are improvements over what cursor was releasing over the last year or so.

If there are paradigm-shattering improvements every six months, every single study that is ever released will be "behind" or "use an older tool." In six months when a study comes out using Claude Code, people dissatisfied with it will be able to point to the newest hotness, ad infinitum.

Re: Coding with LLMs in the summer of 2025 – an update

#123

Post by chis »

quantumHazer wrote: post #9

I'm going a little offtopic here, but I disagree with the OPs use of the term "PhD-level knowledge", although I have a huge amount of respect for antirez (beside that we are born in the same island). This phrasing can be misleading and points to a broader misunderstanding about the nature of doctoral studies, which it has been influenced by the marketing and hype discourse surrounding AI labs. The assertion that ther…

If you understand that a PhD is about much more than just knowledge, it's still the case that having easy access to that knowledge is super valuable. My last job we often had questions that would just traditionally require a PhD-level person to answer, even if it wasn't at the limit of their research abilities. "What will happen to the interface of two materials if voltage is applied in one direction" type stuff, turns out to be really hard to answer but LLMs do a decent job.

Re: Coding with LLMs in the summer of 2025 – an update

#125

Post by skippyboxedhero »

Cheer2171 wrote: post #73
skippyboxedhero wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people got into coding to code, rather than build things. If the AI is doing the coding then that is a threat to some people. I am not sure why, LLMs can be good and you can enjoy coding...those things are unrelated. The logic seems to be that if LLMs are good then coding is less fun, lol.

Software jobs pay more than artist jobs because coding builds things. You can still be a code artist on your own time. Nobody is stopping you from writing in assembler.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ people didn't stop playing chess because computers were better at it than them

Re: Coding with LLMs in the summer of 2025 – an update

#126

Post by ozgung »

dakiol wrote: post #25

> Gemini 2.5 PRO | Claude Opus 4 Whether it's vibe coding, agentic coding, or copy pasting from the web interface to your editor, it's still sad to see the normalization of private (i.e., paid) LLM models. I like the progress that LLMs introduce and I see them as a powerful tool, but I cannot understand how programmers (whether complete nobodies or popular figures) dont mind adding a strong dependency on a third part…

> The excuse "but you earn six figures, what' $200/month to you?" doesn't really capture the issue here.

Just like every other subscription model, including the one in the Black Mirror episode, Common People. The value is too good to be true for the price at the beginning. But you become their prisoner in the long run, with increasing prices and degrading quality.

Re: Coding with LLMs in the summer of 2025 – an update

#127

Post by jstummbillig »

vorador wrote: post #113
jstummbillig wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are free options and there continue to be non-free options. The same is true for LLMs.

When's the last time you paid for a compiler?

The original point was that there is some inherent tradition in programming being free, with a direct critique wrt LLMs, which apparently breaks that tradition.

And my point is that's simply not the case. Different products have always been not free, and continue to be not free. Recent example would be something like Unity, that is not entirely free, but has competitors, which are entirely free and open source. JetBrain is something someone else brought up.

Again: You have local LLMs and I have every expectation they will improve. What exactly are we complaining about? That people continue to build products that are not free and, gasp, other people will pay for them, as they always have?

Re: Coding with LLMs in the summer of 2025 – an update

#128

Post by quantumHazer »

chis wrote: post #123
quantumHazer wrote: post #9

I'm going a little offtopic here, but I disagree with the OPs use of the term "PhD-level knowledge", although I have a huge amount of respect for antirez (beside that we are born in the same island). This phrasing can be misleading and points to a broader misunderstanding about the nature of doctoral studies, which it has been influenced by the marketing and hype discourse surrounding AI labs. The assertion that ther…

If you understand that a PhD is about much more than just knowledge, it's still the case that having easy access to that knowledge is super valuable. My last job we often had questions that would just traditionally require a PhD-level person to answer, even if it wasn't at the limit of their research abilities. "What will happen to the interface of two materials if voltage is applied in one direction" type stuff, tur…

Have you checked experimentally the response of the LLM?

Anyway I don't think this is ""PhD-knowledge"" questions, but job related electrical engineering questions.

Re: Coding with LLMs in the summer of 2025 – an update

#129

Post by positron26 »

righthand wrote: post #63
dakiol wrote: post #25

> Gemini 2.5 PRO | Claude Opus 4 Whether it's vibe coding, agentic coding, or copy pasting from the web interface to your editor, it's still sad to see the normalization of private (i.e., paid) LLM models. I like the progress that LLMs introduce and I see them as a powerful tool, but I cannot understand how programmers (whether complete nobodies or popular figures) dont mind adding a strong dependency on a third part…

It’s weird that programmers will champion paying for Llm but not ad-free web search.

Ad-free search doesn't by itself produce a unique product. It's just a product that doesn't have noise, noise that people with attention spans and focus don't experience at all.

Local models are not quite there yet. For now, use the evil bad tools to prepare for the good free tools when they do get there. It's a self-correcting form of technical debt that we will never have to pay down.

Re: Coding with LLMs in the summer of 2025 – an update

#130

Post by kgwgk »

mirekrusin wrote: post #117
cafp12 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO It's not unlike all other "dev" tools we use at all. There are tons of free and open tools that usually lag a bit behind the paid versions. People pay for jetbrains, for mac os, and even to search the web (google ads). You have very powerful open weight models, they are not the cutting edge. Even those you can't really run locally, so you'd have to pay a 3rd party to run it. Also the competition is awesome to see…

You don't pay for macOS, you pay for apple device, operating system is free.

You do pay for the operating system. And for future upgrades to the operating system. Revenue recognition is a complex and evolving issue.
Post reply on HN