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

Kite is saying farewell and open-sourcing its code

kite.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 547 posts

Re: Kite is saying farewell and open-sourcing its code

#371

Post by bjarneh »

brandelune wrote: post #356

The AI hype is finally over. Meta's language models, GH Pilot, real life car auto-pilot. When it fails, it fails big. And the "we were 10+ years early to market" is just a big lie that bought them plenty of VC money. Good for them.

> The AI hype is finally over.

At least partially over. It's one of those things though; when you first see what's possible with neural networks it does get your hopes up. When you later realize the limitations, it's hard to walk back your old claims. Even Elon Musk has to realize that FSD is never going to happen by now. Google with all their learning and training data, still can't correctly find and smudge license plates or faces correctly on Google maps. If that much processing power cannot correctly identify two classes of objects, what chance do these cars have to classify tons more objects + adapt how they steer based on that information in real time?

Re: Kite is saying farewell and open-sourcing its code

#372

Post by lycopodiopsida »

batushka3 wrote: post #369
mythz wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

JetBrains IDE's is the most notable exception of dev tools I personally pay for, insane value and productivity makes it a no-brainer purchase given its instant ROI from time saved. Life's too short to not maximize your productivity for a few $'s.

Quoted post unavailable.

JetBrains is a czech company. And always was, as in "founded in Prague". Stop spreading FUD.

Re: Kite is saying farewell and open-sourcing its code

#373

Post by carlmr »

Toutouxc wrote: post #332
dento wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do that once, and nobody will pay the full price again. They'll just be waiting for the next discount.

But would that be worse than the same people just using the trial indefinitely?

The question is how many people pay the $99 now and how many pay the $10 then. If you can't convert 10x the people you have paying now, you will be losing money.

Re: Kite is saying farewell and open-sourcing its code

#374

Post by chirau »

batushka3 wrote: post #369
mythz wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

JetBrains IDE's is the most notable exception of dev tools I personally pay for, insane value and productivity makes it a no-brainer purchase given its instant ROI from time saved. Life's too short to not maximize your productivity for a few $'s.

Quoted post unavailable.

Firstly, JetBrains is not a Russian company.

Secondly, not everything and everyone from Russia is bad. But if you subscribe to that narrative, good for you and good luck finding a tool that comes close to JetBrains.

Re: Kite is saying farewell and open-sourcing its code

#376

Post by piokoch »

batushka3 wrote: post #369
mythz wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

JetBrains IDE's is the most notable exception of dev tools I personally pay for, insane value and productivity makes it a no-brainer purchase given its instant ROI from time saved. Life's too short to not maximize your productivity for a few $'s.

Quoted post unavailable.

From what I know this is Czech company, not Russian.

Re: Kite is saying farewell and open-sourcing its code

#377

Post by carlmr »

bjarneh wrote: post #371
brandelune wrote: post #356

The AI hype is finally over. Meta's language models, GH Pilot, real life car auto-pilot. When it fails, it fails big. And the "we were 10+ years early to market" is just a big lie that bought them plenty of VC money. Good for them.

> The AI hype is finally over. At least partially over. It's one of those things though; when you first see what's possible with neural networks it does get your hopes up. When you later realize the limitations, it's hard to walk back your old claims. Even Elon Musk has to realize that FSD is never going to happen by now. Google with all their learning and training data, still can't correctly find and smudge license…

The internet was a hype cycle, which ended with the dot com bubble burst. But some of the companies that came out of the bubble came out strong. AI has had multiple hype cycles, like every washing machine with "fuzzy logic" in the 90s, they usually end, but they do usually leave us with more than we had. This AI hype cycle is ending now, and we have seen a lot of progress on image detection, video editing, etc. but the highest targets haven't been reached.

It's kind of the explore-exploit dichotomy. You have some new technology (internet), in the first few years you have exploration and all the low hanging fruit are implemented, then everybody just starts iterating on similar ideas, which lead to less and less gain. The Uber/AirBnb/Amazon for X pitches. If you hear those you're in the late phase of the hype cycle. Because Y for X just means it's not a really new idea and plenty of people have thought of those.

Similarly you have some new technology like fuzzy logic, then some people thought of some good applications. But because the hype train was running it was put everywhere where it didn't make sense.

Or deep learning which was the first to have useful image processing. Now most research is tuning some parameters, adding compute, and hoping for better results.

But in the end we'll be left with some technological advances, and maybe in ten or twenty years somebody has a new idea which beats deep learning in learning efficiency.

Re: Kite is saying farewell and open-sourcing its code

#378

Post by Dave3of5 »

I wonder if a better approach is to build and train the ML model to recognize the AST of the code in question rather than text. The workflow would be Build AST -> run ML to get an optimised solution render new code out from that optimised AST.

A lot of work I think and as is pointed out here devs wants their tooling for free.

Re: Kite is saying farewell and open-sourcing its code

#379

Post by yellow_lead »

cfn wrote: post #368
irrational wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m a web developer. My company pays for JetBrains IntelliJ for me. And I love it. But, if I had to pay for it out of my own pocket, I’d use VS Code instead. I’ve used both and IntelliJ is superior to VS Code, but not to such an extent that I would pay my own money for it. But I’m more than happy to have my company buy it for me.

I have been paying for Resharper (and now Rider and DataGrip) for over fifteen years. Some companies where I worked paid for it other didn't but it didn't matter. It improves the quality of my code and I believe it gives me a competitive edge. It also helps keeping me sane as I work with a lot of legacy code. I see it like a construction worker that uses his own tools instead of the broken down ones of the site. It m…

Resharper is really great for VS, and I would probably be willing to pay for it if the performance were a bit better. Some of this is probably VS' fault. I'm excited to try CLion again once my project supports it, but from what I remember the debugging experience is not so good.

Re: Kite is saying farewell and open-sourcing its code

#380

Post by narag »

LASR wrote: post #235

> Our diagnosis is that individual developers do not pay for tools. I know this first hand, building a developer tool startup and failing to reach any level of revenue. In the end, the tech was bought out by a larger company to recover a fraction of our VC investment. The challenge is that when you're building software for developers, they already know how it must work. It's like trying to sell magic tricks to magici…

The challenge is that when you're building software for developers, they already know how it must work.

Do you mean that what you built didn't worked as it should? I don't understand, I've paid multiple times for tools that I find useful, even if they weren't perfect.

This misconception has been promoted by companies with an interest in promoting their platforms, using the expeditive procedure of subsidizing (often inferior) tools, with the collateral effect of making impossible for tools vendors to compete.

But by no means it's a law of physics. Make something programmers want. It's weird how little have the tools improved in twenty years.

Post reply on HN