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

Opus 4.5 is not the normal AI agent experience that I have had thus far

burkeholland.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 1001 posts

Re: Opus 4.5 is not the normal AI agent experience that I have had thus far

#271

Post by blibble »

YesBox wrote: post #245

I've noticed a huge drop in negative comments on HN when discussing LLMs in the last 1-2 months. All the LLM coded projects I've seen shared so far[1] have been tech toys though. I've watched things pop up on my twitter feed (usually games related), then quietly go off air before reaching a gold release (I manually keep up to date with what I've found, so it's not the algorithm). I find this all very interesting: LLM…

> I've noticed a huge drop in negative comments on HN when discussing LLMs in the last 1-2 months.

real people get fed up of debating the same tired "omg new model 1000x better now" posts/comments from the astroturfers, the shills and their bots each time OpenAI shits out a new model

(article author is a Microslop employee)

Re: Opus 4.5 is not the normal AI agent experience that I have had thus far

#272

Post by simonw »

blibble wrote: post #271
YesBox wrote: post #245

I've noticed a huge drop in negative comments on HN when discussing LLMs in the last 1-2 months. All the LLM coded projects I've seen shared so far[1] have been tech toys though. I've watched things pop up on my twitter feed (usually games related), then quietly go off air before reaching a gold release (I manually keep up to date with what I've found, so it's not the algorithm). I find this all very interesting: LLM…

> I've noticed a huge drop in negative comments on HN when discussing LLMs in the last 1-2 months. real people get fed up of debating the same tired "omg new model 1000x better now" posts/comments from the astroturfers, the shills and their bots each time OpenAI shits out a new model (article author is a Microslop employee)

You're only hurting yourself if you decide there's some wild conspiracy afoot here to pay shills to tell people that coding agents are useful... as opposed to people finding them useful enough to want to tell other people about it.

Re: Opus 4.5 is not the normal AI agent experience that I have had thus far

#273

Post by flanked-evergl »

soulofmischief wrote: post #179

Opus 4.5 is currently helping me write a novel, comprehensive and highly performant programming language with all of the things I've ever wanted, done in exactly my opinionated way. This project would have taken me years of specialization and research to do right. Opus's strength has been the ability to both speak broadly and also drill down into low-level implementations. I can express an intent, and have some discu…

Helping you do something that nobody should be doing is not really compelling.

Re: Opus 4.5 is not the normal AI agent experience that I have had thus far

#274

Post by LinXitoW »

ncruces wrote: post #210
structural wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but my junior coworkers also don't reliably do edge case testing for user errors either unless specifically tasked to do so, likely with a checklist of specific kinds of user errors they need to check for. And it turns out the quality of output you get from both the humans and the models is highly correlated with the quality of the specification you write before you start coding. Letting a model run amok within…

How will those juniors ever grow up to be seniors now?

Even better. Job security for current seniors.

Re: Opus 4.5 is not the normal AI agent experience that I have had thus far

#275

Post by bombdailer »

YesBox wrote: post #245

I've noticed a huge drop in negative comments on HN when discussing LLMs in the last 1-2 months. All the LLM coded projects I've seen shared so far[1] have been tech toys though. I've watched things pop up on my twitter feed (usually games related), then quietly go off air before reaching a gold release (I manually keep up to date with what I've found, so it's not the algorithm). I find this all very interesting: LLM…

The type of people to use AI are necessarily the people who will struggle most when it comes time to do the last essential 20% of the work that AI can't do. Once thinking is required to bring all the parts into a whole, the person who gives over their thinking skills to AI will not be equipped to do the work, either because they never had the capacity to begin with or because AI has smoothed out the ripples of their brain. I say this from experience.

Re: Opus 4.5 is not the normal AI agent experience that I have had thus far

#276

Post by blibble »

simonw wrote: post #272
blibble wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've noticed a huge drop in negative comments on HN when discussing LLMs in the last 1-2 months. real people get fed up of debating the same tired "omg new model 1000x better now" posts/comments from the astroturfers, the shills and their bots each time OpenAI shits out a new model (article author is a Microslop employee)

You're only hurting yourself if you decide there's some wild conspiracy afoot here to pay shills to tell people that coding agents are useful... as opposed to people finding them useful enough to want to tell other people about it.

[flagged]

Re: Opus 4.5 is not the normal AI agent experience that I have had thus far

#277

Post by adastra22 »

yieldcrv wrote: post #212
ryandrake wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was me. I was a huge AI coding detractor on here for a while (you can check my comment history). But, in order to stay informed and not just be that grouchy curmudgeon all the time, I kept up with the models and regularly tried them out. Opus 4.5 is so much better than anything I've tried before, I'm ready to change my mind about AI assistance. I even gave -True Vibe Coding- a whirl. Yesterday, from a blank dire…

I recently replaced my monitor with one that could be vertically oriented, because I'm just using Claude Code in the terminal and not looking at file trees at all but I do want a better way to glance and keep up with what its doing in longer conversations, for my own mental context window

Ah, but you’re at the beginning stage young grasshopper. Soon you will be missing that horizontal ultra wide monitor as you spin up 8 different Claude agents in parallel seasons.

Re: Opus 4.5 is not the normal AI agent experience that I have had thus far

#278

Post by TacticalCoder »

losvedir wrote: post #247

I'm kind of surprised how many people are okay with deploying code that hasn't been audited. I read If Anyone Builds It Everyone Dies over the break. The basic premise was that we can't "align" AI so when we turn it loose in an agent loop what it produces isn't necessarily what we want. It may be on the surface, to appease us and pass a cursory inspection, but it could embed other stuff according to other goals. On t…

Why think about nefarious intent instead of just user error? In this case LLM error instead of programmer error.

Most RCEs, 0-days, and whatnots are not due to the NSA hiding behind the "Jia Tan" pseudo to try to backdoor all the SSH servers on all the systemd [1] Linuxes in the world: they're just programmer errors.

I think accidental security holes with LLMs are way, way, way more likely than actual malicious attempts.

And with the amount of code spoutted by LLMs, it is indeed --and the lack of audit is-- an issue.

[1] I know, I know: it's totally unrelated to systemd. Yet only systems using systemd would have been pwned. If you're pro-systemd you've got your point of view on this but I've got mine and you won't change my mind so don't bother.

Re: Opus 4.5 is not the normal AI agent experience that I have had thus far

#279

Post by wiml »

6177c40f wrote: post #72
OldGreenYodaGPT wrote: post #33

Most software engineers are seriously sleeping on how good LLM agents are right now, especially something like Claude Code. Once you’ve got Claude Code set up, you can point it at your codebase, have it learn your conventions, pull in best practices, and refine everything until it’s basically operating like a super-powered teammate. The real unlock is building a solid set of reusable “skills” plus a few agents for th…

I think we're entering a world where programmers as such won't really exist (except perhaps in certain niches). Being able to program (and read code, in particular) will probably remain useful, though diminished in value. What will matter more is your ability to actually create things, using whatever tools are necessary and available, and have them actually be useful. Which, in a way, is the same as it ever was. Ther…

We've been living in that world since the invention of the compiler ("automatic programming"). Few people write machine code any more. If you think of LLMs as a new variety of compiler, a lot of their shortcomings are easier to describe.

Re: Opus 4.5 is not the normal AI agent experience that I have had thus far

#280

Post by heavyset_go »

rcarmo wrote: post #205

I had a similar set of experiences with GPT 5.x over the holiday break, across somewhat more disparate domains: https://taoofmac.com/space/notes/2025/12/31/1830 I hacked together a Swift tool to replace a Python automation I had, merged an ARM JIT engine into a 68k emulator, and even got a very decent start on a synth project I’ve been meaning to do for years. What has become immensely apparent to me is that even gpt…

To add to the anecdata, today GPT 5.2-whatever hallucinated the existence of two CLI utilities, and when corrected, then hallucinated the existence of non-existent, but plausible, features/options of CLI utilities that do actually exist.

I had to dig through source code to confirm whether those features actually existed. They don't, so the CLI tools GPT recommended aren't actually applicable to my use case.

Yesterday, it hallucinated features of WebDav clients, and then talked up an abandoned and incomplete project on GitHub with a dozen stars as if it was the perfect fit for what I was trying to do, when it wasn't.

I only remember these because they're recent and CLI related, given the topic, but there are experiences like this daily across different subjects and domains.

Post reply on HN