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

I was a top 0.01% Cursor user, then switched to Claude Code 2.0

blog.silennai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 236 posts

Re: I was a top 0.01% Cursor user, then switched to Claude Code 2.0

#121

Post by lefra »

asdff wrote: post #28
stavros wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe, but you won't be able to test all behaviors and you won't have enough time to try a million alternatives. Just because of the number of possibilities, it'll be faster to just read the code.

Eventually the generation and evaluation will be quite fast where testing a million alternatives will be viable. Impressive you suggest that there might be a million alternatives but it would be faster to just read the code and settle on one. How might that be determined? Did the author who wrote the standard library really come up with the best way when writing those functions? Or did they come up with something tha…

A million alternatives is peanuts. Restricting the search space to text files with 37 possible symbols (letters, numbers, space), a million different files can be generated with just 4 symbols.

A trillion is 8 symbols. You still haven't reached the end of your first import statement.

I just took a random source file on my computer. It has about 8000 characters. The number of possible files with 8000 characters has 12500 digits.

At this point, restricting the search space to syntactically valid programs (how do you even randomly generate that?) won't make a difference.

Re: I was a top 0.01% Cursor user, then switched to Claude Code 2.0

#122

Post by Ronsenshi »

AIorNot wrote: post #31
madrox wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's doesn't work...yet. I agree my stomach churns a little at this sentence. However, paying customers care about reliability and performance. Code review helps that today, but it's only a matter of time before it is more performative than useful in serving those goals at the cost of velocity.

the (multi) billon dollar question is when that will happen, I think, case in point: the OP is a kid in his 20s describing the history of the last 3 years or so of small scale AI Development ( https://www.linkedin.com/in/silen-naihin/details/experience/ ) How does that compare to those of us with 15-50 years of software engineering experience working on giant codebases that have years of domain rules, customers and u…

I'm currently in a strange position where I am being that developer with 15+ years of industry experience managing a project that's been taken over by a young AI/vibe-code team (against my advise) that plans to do complete rewrite in a low-code service.

Project was started in late 00s so it has substantial amount of business logic, rules and decisions. Maybe I'm being an old man shouting at the clouds, but I assume (or hope?) it would fail to deliver whatever they promised to the CEO.

So, I guess I'll see the result of this shift soon enough - hopefully at a different company by the time AI-people are done.

Re: I was a top 0.01% Cursor user, then switched to Claude Code 2.0

#123

Post by wyldfire »

sailorganymede wrote: post #110

Meanwhile here’s me still just using the ChatGPT web chat asking it for code snippets.

I found that when I used ChatGPT's web chat, I frequently went back and forth, shuttling its output to an editor or IDE and then coming back to ChatGPT with "oh, now it fails like this: ...". It made me feel like I was the automaton now.

Claude Code was transformative and it made me realize that something very incredibly significant had occurred. Letting the LLM "drive" like this was inevitable. Now I see just exactly how this will transform our industry. I'm a little scared about how it will end for me/us, but excited for now.

Re: I was a top 0.01% Cursor user, then switched to Claude Code 2.0

#126

Post by Alupis »

wyldfire wrote: post #123
sailorganymede wrote: post #110

Meanwhile here’s me still just using the ChatGPT web chat asking it for code snippets.

I found that when I used ChatGPT's web chat, I frequently went back and forth, shuttling its output to an editor or IDE and then coming back to ChatGPT with "oh, now it fails like this: ...". It made me feel like I was the automaton now. Claude Code was transformative and it made me realize that something very incredibly significant had occurred. Letting the LLM "drive" like this was inevitable. Now I see just exactl…

I've found that "back and forth" is part of the learning aspect LLM's provide. Even when the LLM provides code snippets, I type them out myself, which I've found forces me to think and understand them - often finding flaws and poor assumptions along the way.

Letting an LLM drive in an agentic flow removes you from the equation. Maybe that's what some want - but I've personally found I end up with something that doesn't feel like I wrote it.

Now... get off my lawn!

Re: I was a top 0.01% Cursor user, then switched to Claude Code 2.0

#127

Post by Ronsenshi »

natpat wrote: post #33
kelseyfrog wrote: post #26

The "Council of models" is a good first step, but ultimately I found myself settling on an automated talent acquisition pipeline. I have a BIRTHING_POOL.md that combines the best AGENTS.md and introduces random AI-generated mutations and deletions. The candidates are tested using take-home PRs which are reviewed by HR.md and TECH_MANAGER.md. TECH_MANAGER.md measures completion rate per tokens (effectiveness) and then…

Is this satire? I can't tell any more.

I sincerely hope so. Gas Towns, Birthing Pools, Ralf Wiggums. Some people seems to have lost any sense of reality.

Re: I was a top 0.01% Cursor user, then switched to Claude Code 2.0

#128

Post by sunaookami »

Mashimo wrote: post #125

Anyone tried claude code with z.ai subscription? It's only for a fraction of the price, but 3 times as much limits. I currently use github subscription for hobby projects.

Was also tempted by the price but GLM-4.6 was so terrible that I instantly subscribed to Claude again, it's just not worth it. Don't know if 4.7 is much improved but for me nothing can compete with Claude sadly.

Re: I was a top 0.01% Cursor user, then switched to Claude Code 2.0

#129

Post by onion2k »

AIorNot wrote: post #31
madrox wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's doesn't work...yet. I agree my stomach churns a little at this sentence. However, paying customers care about reliability and performance. Code review helps that today, but it's only a matter of time before it is more performative than useful in serving those goals at the cost of velocity.

the (multi) billon dollar question is when that will happen, I think, case in point: the OP is a kid in his 20s describing the history of the last 3 years or so of small scale AI Development ( https://www.linkedin.com/in/silen-naihin/details/experience/ ) How does that compare to those of us with 15-50 years of software engineering experience working on giant codebases that have years of domain rules, customers and u…

How does that compare to those of us with 15-50 years of software engineering experience working on giant codebases that have years of domain rules, customers and use cases etc.

At most of the companies I've worked at the development team is more like a cluster of individuals who all happen to be contributing to a shared codebase than anything resembling an actual team who collaborate on a shared goal. AI-assisted engineering would have helped massively because the AI would be looking outside of the myopic view any developer who is only focused on their tiny domain in the bigger whole cared about.

Admittedly though, on a genuinely good team it'll be less useful for a long time.

Re: I was a top 0.01% Cursor user, then switched to Claude Code 2.0

#130

Post by fhd2 »

Ronsenshi wrote: post #122
AIorNot wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the (multi) billon dollar question is when that will happen, I think, case in point: the OP is a kid in his 20s describing the history of the last 3 years or so of small scale AI Development ( https://www.linkedin.com/in/silen-naihin/details/experience/ ) How does that compare to those of us with 15-50 years of software engineering experience working on giant codebases that have years of domain rules, customers and u…

I'm currently in a strange position where I am being that developer with 15+ years of industry experience managing a project that's been taken over by a young AI/vibe-code team (against my advise) that plans to do complete rewrite in a low-code service. Project was started in late 00s so it has substantial amount of business logic, rules and decisions. Maybe I'm being an old man shouting at the clouds, but I assume (…

The problem is, feedback cycles for projects are long. Like 1-10 years depending on the nature and environment. As the saying goes, the market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.

Maybe the deed is done here, and I'd agree it's not particularly fun, but you could still think about what you can bring to the table in situations like this. Can you work on shortening these pesky feedback cycles? Can you help the team (if they even accept it) with _some_ degree of engineering? It might not be the last time this happens.

I think right now we're seeing some weird stuff going on, but I think it hasn't even properly started yet. Remember when pretty much every company went "agile"? In most cases I've seen they didn't, just wasting time chasing miracles with principles and methodologies few people understand deeply enough to apply. Yet this went on for, what, 10 years?

Post reply on HN