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

251–260 of 434 posts

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

#251

Post by oblio »

__loam wrote: post #243
oblio wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't be rude.

He's being honest, not rude

Honesty doesn't look like this:

> [...] get lost [...]

> [..] We don't want you to be a part of it either. [...]

He's being rude.

Honesty would be, something like:

> I (and probably many others) like programming a lot. Even if you're frustrated with it, I think a great deal of people will be sad if somehow programming disappeared completely. It might be best for you if you just found a job that you love more, instead.

Also the original comment makes a point that's SUPER valid and anyone working as a professional programmer for 10+ years can't really deny:

> poorly if at all maintained libraries, tools, frameworks

Most commercial code just sucks due to misaligned incentives. Open Source is better, but not always, as a lot of Open Source code is just commercial code opened up after the fact.

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

#252

Post by zer00eyz »

mleo wrote: post #219
zer00eyz wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Why wouldn’t 3rd party hardware vendors continue to work on reducing costs of running models locally? If there is a market opportunity for someone to make money, it will be filled. Just because the cloud vendors don’t develop hardware someone will. Apple has vested interest in making hardware to run better models locally, for example.

> Why wouldn’t 3rd party hardware vendors continue to work on reducing costs of running models locally?

Every one wants this to happen they are all trying but...

EUV, what has gotten us down to 3nm and less is HARD. Reduction in chip size has lead to increases in density and lower costs. But now yields are DOWN and the design concessions to make the processes work are hurting costs and performance. There are a lot of hopes and prayers in the 1.8 nodes but things look grim.

Power is a massive problem for everyone. It is a MASSIVE a problem IN the data center and it is a problem for GPU's at home. Considering that locally is a PHONE for most people it's an even bigger problem. With all this power comes cooling issues. The industry is starting to look at all sorts of interesting ways to move heat away from cores... ones that don't involve air.

Design has hit a wall as well. If you look at NVIDIA's latest offering its IPC, (thats Instructions Per Clock cycle) you will find they are flat. The only gains between the latest generation and previous have come from small frequency upticks. These gains came from using "more power!!!", and thats a problem because...

Memory is a problem. There is a reason that the chips for GPU's are soldered on to the boards next to the processors. There is a reason that laptops have them soldered on too. CAMM try's to fix some of this but the results are, to say the least, disappointing thus far.

All of this has been hitting cpu's slowly, but we have also had the luxury of "more cores" to throw at things. If you go back 10-15 years a top end server is about the same as a top end desktop today (core count, single core perf). Because of all of the above issues I don't think you are going to get 700+ core consumer desktops in a decade (current high end for server CPU)... because of power, costs etc.

Unless we see some foundational breakthrough in hardware (it could happen), you wont see the normal generational lift in performance that you have in the past (and I would argue that we already haven't been seeing that). Someone is going to have to make MAJOR investments in the software side, and there is NO MOAT by doing so. Simply put it's a bad investment... and if we can't lower the cost of compute (and it looks like we can't) its going to be hard for small players to get in and innovate.

It's likely you're seeing a very real wall.

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

#253

Post by [deleted] »

on_the_train wrote: post #26
brokencode wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it even more sad when people come out of the woodwork on every LLM post to tell us that our positive experiences using LLMs are imagined and we just haven’t realized how bad they are yet.

If LLMs were actually useful, there would be no need to scream it everywhere. On the contrary: it would be a guarded secret.

[deleted]

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

#254

Post by paulddraper »

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…

And you thought Visual Studio was free?

Or Windows?

Or an Apple Developer License?

There are free/free-ish, options, but there have always been paid tools.

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

#255

Post by [deleted] »

oblio wrote: post #251
__loam wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's being honest, not rude

Honesty doesn't look like this: > [...] get lost [...] > [..] We don't want you to be a part of it either. [...] He's being rude. Honesty would be, something like: > I (and probably many others) like programming a lot. Even if you're frustrated with it, I think a great deal of people will be sad if somehow programming disappeared completely. It might be best for you if you just found a job that you love more, instead…

[deleted]

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

#256

Post by muglug »

throwaway8879p wrote: post #48
dakiol wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see a big difference: I do use Jetbrains IDEs (they are nice), but I can switch to vim (or vscode) any time if I need to (e.g., let's say Jetbrains increase their price to a point that doesn't make sense, or perhaps they introduce a pervasive feature that cannot be disabled). The problem with paid LLMs is that one cannot easily switch to open-source ones (because they are not as good as the paid ones). So, it's a d…

People who understand the importance of this choice but still opt for closed source software are the worst of the worst. You won’t be able to switch to a meaningful vim if you channel your support to closed source software, not for long. Best to put money where the mouth is.

Until you’ve run a big open-source project you won’t quite understand how much time and energy it can eat up. All that effort won’t feed your family.

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

#257

Post by midasz »

webappguy wrote: post #134
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 personally can’t wait for programming to ‘die’. It has stolen a decade of my life minimum. Like veterinarians being trained to help pets ultimately finding out a huge portion of the job is killing them. I was not sufficiently informed that I’d spend a decade arguing languages, dealing with thousands of other developers with diverging opinions, legacy code, poorly if at all maintained libraries, tools, frameworks, e…

Damn dude. I'm just having fun most of the time. The field is so insanely broad that if you've got an ounce of affinity there's a corner that would fit you snugly AND you'd make a decent living. Take a look around.

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

#259

Post by thefourthchime »

wg0 wrote: post #258

I don't understand. Is author suggesting manually pasting redis C files into Gemini Pro chat window on the web?

I was mostly nodding my head until he got to this part.

The fundamental requirement for the LLM to be used is: don’t use agents or things like editor with integrated coding agents.

So right, is he like actually copying and pasting stuff into a chat window? I did this before Co-Pilot, but with cursor I would never think of doing that. He never mentioned Cursor or Claude Code so I wonder if he's even experienced it.

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

#260

Post by jpdus »

Keyframe wrote: post #15

Unlike OP, from my still limited but intense month or so diving into this topic so far, I had better luck with Gemini 2.5 PRO and Opus 4 on more abstract level like architecture etc. and then dealing input to Sonnet for coding. I found 2.5 PRO, and to a lesser degree Opus, were hit or miss; A lot of instances of them circling around the issue and correcting itself when coding (Gemini especially so), whereas Sonnet wo…

This is also confirmed by internal cline statistics where Opus and Gemini 2.5 pro both perform worse than Sonnet 4 in real-world scenarios

https://x.com/pashmerepat/status/1946392456456732758/photo/1

Post reply on HN