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

201–210 of 434 posts

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

#201

Post by LeafItAlone »

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…

>I am afraid that in a few years, that will no longer be possible (as in most programmers will be so tied to a paid LLM

As of now, I’m seeing no lock-in for any LLM. With tools like Aider, Cursor, etc., you can swim on a whim. And with Aider, I do.

That’s what I currently don’t get in terms of investment. Companies (in many instances, VCs) are spending billions of dollars and tomorrow someone else eats their lunch. They are going to need to determine that method of lock-in at some point, but I don’t see it happening with the way I use the tools.

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

#202

Post by zer00eyz »

simonw wrote: post #141
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 models I can run locally aren't as good yet, and are way more expensive to operate. Once it becomes economical to run a Claude 4 class model locally you'll see a lot more people doing that. The closest you can get right now might be Kimi K2 on a pair of 512GB Mac Studios, at a cost of about $20,000.

> Once it becomes economical to run a Claude 4 class model locally you'll see a lot more people doing that.

Historically these sorts of things happened because of Moores law. Moores law is dead. For a while we have scaled on the back of "more cores", and process shrink. It looks like we hit the wall again.

We seem to be near the limit of scaling (physics) we're not seeing a lot in clock (some but not enough), and IPC is flat. We are also having power (density) and cooling (air wont cut it any more) issues.

The requirements to run something like claud 4 local aren't going to make it to house hold consumers any time soon. Simply put the very top end of consumer PC's looks like 10 year old server hardware, and very few people are running that because there isn't a need.

The only way we're going to see better models locally is if there is work (research, engineering) put into it. To be blunt that isnt really happening, because Fb/MS/Google are scaling in the only way they know how. Throw money at it to capture and dominate the market, lock out the innovators from your API and then milk the consumer however you can. Smaller, and local is antithetical to this business model.

Hoping for the innovation that gives you a moat, that makes you the next IBM isnt the best way to run a business.

Based on how often Google cancels projects, based on how often the things Zuck swear are "next" face plant (metaverse) one should not have a lot of hope about AI>

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

#203

Post by LeafItAlone »

Fervicus wrote: post #164
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…

> I cannot understand how programmers don't mind adding a strong dependency on a third party in order to keep programming And how they don't mind freely opening up their codebase to these bigtech companies.

You mean the same companies they are hosting their VCS in and providing the infrastructure they deploy their codebases to? All in support of their CRUD application that is in a space with 15 identical competitors? My codebase is not my secret sauce.

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

#204

Post by geoka9 »

Fervicus wrote: post #164
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…

> I cannot understand how programmers don't mind adding a strong dependency on a third party in order to keep programming And how they don't mind freely opening up their codebase to these bigtech companies.

> > I cannot understand how programmers don't mind adding a strong dependency on a third party in order to keep programming > > And how they don't mind freely opening up their codebase to these bigtech companies.

And how they don't mind opening up their development machines to agents driven by a black-box program that is run in the cloud by a vendor that itself doesn't completely understand how it works.

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

#205

Post by hedgehog »

fumeux_fume wrote: post #112
kgwgk wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://docs.github.com/en/copilot/reference/ai-models/suppo...

Thank you! When I was testing out Copilot I was stuck with whatever default LLM was being used. Didn't realize you could switch it out for a non-MS/OpenAI model.

In my testing Sonnet 4 is far better than any of the Google or OpenAI models.

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

#206

Post by jacobr1 »

spyckie2 wrote: post #21
antirez wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree with that. Read it as expert-level knowledge without all the other stuff LLMs can’t do as well as humans. LLMs way to express knowledge is kinda of alien as it is different, so indeed those are all poor simplifications. For instance an LLM can’t code as well as a top human coder but can write a non trivial program from the first to the last character without iterating.

Hey antirez, What sticks out to me is Gemini catching bugs before production release, was hoping you’d give a little more insight into that. Reason being is that we expect ai to create bugs and we catch them, but if Gemini is spotting bugs by some way of it being a QA (not just by writing and passing tests) then that perks my interest.

Our team has pretty aggressively started using LLMs for automated code review. It will look at our PRs and post comments. We can adding more material for different things for it to consider- from a looking at a summarized version of our API guidelines, general prompts like, "You are an expert software engineer and QA professional, review this PR and point out any bugs or other areas of technical risk. Make concise suggestions for improvement where applicable." - it catches a ton of stuff.

Another area we've started doing is having it look at build failures and writing a report on suggested root causes before even a human looks at it - saves time.

Or (and we haven't rolled this out automatically yet but are testing a prototype) having it triage alarms from our metrics, with access to the logs and codebase to investigate.

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

#207

Post by steveklabnik »

krupan wrote: post #178

What is the overall feedback loop with LLMs writing code? Do they learn as they go like we do? Do they just learn from reading code on GitHub? If the latter, what happens as less and less code gets written by human experts? Do the LLMs then stagnate in their progress and start to degrade? Kind of like making analog copies of analog copies of analog copies?

> Do they learn as they go like we do?

It's complicated. You have to understand that when you ask an LLM something, you have the model itself, which is kind of like a function: put something in, get something out. However, you also pass an argument to that function: the context.

So, in a literal sense, no, they do not learn as they go, in the sense that the model, that function, is unchanged by what you send it. But the context can be modified. So, in some sense, an LLM in a agentic loop that goes and reads some code from GitHub can include that information in the context it uses in the future, so it will "learn" within the session.

> If the latter, what happens as less and less code gets written by human experts?

So, this is still a possible problem, because future trainings of future LLMs will end up being trained on code written by LLMs. If this is a problem or not is yet to be seen, I don't have a good handle on the debates in this area, personally.

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

#208

Post by jerrygenser »

LeafItAlone wrote: post #201
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…

>I am afraid that in a few years, that will no longer be possible (as in most programmers will be so tied to a paid LLM As of now, I’m seeing no lock-in for any LLM. With tools like Aider, Cursor, etc., you can swim on a whim. And with Aider, I do. That’s what I currently don’t get in terms of investment. Companies (in many instances, VCs) are spending billions of dollars and tomorrow someone else eats their lunch. T…

They can lock in by subsidizing the price of you use their tool, while making the default price larger for wrappers. This can draw people from the wrapper that can support multiple models to the specific CLI that supports the proprietary model.

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

#209

Post by skydhash »

LeafItAlone wrote: post #196
skydhash wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I was a hardcore vim user 10 years ago, but now I just use PyCharm to work. I'm paid to solve problems, not to futz around with vim configs. The reason I don't like those arguments is that they merge two orthogonal stuff: Solving problems and optimizing your tooling. You can optimize PyCharm just as much you can fiddle with Vim's config. And people are solving with problems with Vim just as you do with an IDE. It's…

>The reason I don't like those arguments is that they merge two orthogonal stuff: Solving problems and optimizing your tooling. You can optimize PyCharm just as much you can fiddle with Vim's config. But you’re ignoring that the “optimizing tooling” is for the goal of making it easier for you. Its spending time now to decrease time spent in the long term. I spent over a decade with Emacs as my sole editor and have si…

Emacs is not a python oriented IDE. So the comparison is moot from the beginning. Some people likes what Emacs offers and mesh it with external tools. Some prefers a more complete package. Nothing wrong with either, especially if you have the time and the knowledge to iterate quicly on the first.

What you may need is something others can do without. So what’s best is always subjective.

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

#210

Post by cesarb »

Herring wrote: post #183
krupan wrote: post #178

What is the overall feedback loop with LLMs writing code? Do they learn as they go like we do? Do they just learn from reading code on GitHub? If the latter, what happens as less and less code gets written by human experts? Do the LLMs then stagnate in their progress and start to degrade? Kind of like making analog copies of analog copies of analog copies?

Code and math are similar to chess/go, where verification is (reasonably) easy so you can generate your own high-quality training data. It's not super straightforward, but you should still expect more progress in coming years.

> Code and math are similar to chess/go, where verification is (reasonably) easy

Verification for code would be a formal proof, and these are hard; with a few exceptions like seL4, most code does not have any formal proof. Games like chess and go are much easier to verify. Math is in the middle; it also needs formal proofs, but most of math is doing these formal proofs themselves, and even then there are still unproven conjectures.

Post reply on HN