391–400 of 512 posts
I never want to hear from developers again that they are not susceptible to marketing. I see meet ups specifically about Claude often. Modern tupperware party. A colleague was convinced Claude is better so we played a game. We used the claude code and codex harness and I implemented some prs they needed with gpt5.5 and opus4.7 and asked them to identify which came from which only from the code. Couldn’t tell. Edit: i…
I never want to hear from developers again that they are not susceptible to marketing. I see meet ups specifically about Claude often. Modern tupperware party. A colleague was convinced Claude is better so we played a game. We used the claude code and codex harness and I implemented some prs they needed with gpt5.5 and opus4.7 and asked them to identify which came from which only from the code. Couldn’t tell. Edit: i…
I still use Claude Code because I have the most experience with it now, and it's the harness that I understand on a granular level. If something comes along that is clearly better, or if it becomes clear the Codex is miles ahead, I'll try it and evaluate it. To your point, there doesn't seem to be much of a difference.
Arguing over this stuff feels kind of silly, like back in the day when my friends would give me shit for using mIRC instead of ircii or BitchX. I liked the GUI then because I did. I like Claude Code now because I do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I were to give one carpenter a set of fine hand tools, another a full workshop with power tools, and they both made a picnic table to the same spec, and at the end I wasn't able to tell which came from which, would you say I have come to a fair metric for which type of tooling to use for wood working?
If the effort was the same as was in my test, yes.
In fact, after seeing all these comments about the amount of effort, you redirected at calling that mere "vibes:
> Edit: i bet 99% of people here, if presented with a test where i gave 5 models but all of the results came from one, would not be able to discern this. Just vibes all the way down
Which, again, is a highly emotional way to view people trying to say that the process matters too. Calling people "vibes based" or "highly susceptible to marketting" and saying they take part in "tupperware parties" rather than evaluating their experience with tools is quite a thing to see, a complete dismissal of professionals' core experience as "vibes" rather than something intrinsic to how they perform labor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How can you say this as if supporting Dario is any better. At the top level of anything there is almost no such thing as a non-asshole. None of them care genuinely about you they just want your money.
if dario is just as much of an asshole, he's at least a quieter asshole. and to me, that's better.
I think Sam Altman is an asshole and I prefer to spend my money elsewhere. Frontier models being commoditize is inevitable. OpenAI thinks they're still competing on technology, and not user experience and market reputation otherwise they'd understand the continuous negative PR generated by Altman's chaos is going to cost them everything.
How can you say this as if supporting Dario is any better. At the top level of anything there is almost no such thing as a non-asshole. None of them care genuinely about you they just want your money.
What a sad, bitter worldview. I hope you find some peace.
Sam Altman appears to represent a significant liability for OpenAI’s success from this point forward. A big portion of the driver for Anthropic’s meteoric rise over the last six months appears to be folks recognizing “it’s that AI startup not run by Sam Altman.” Anthropic has amazing tech, but its biggest asset at the moment seems to be that “it’s not OpenAI.” Not saying that’s right or wrong, but it’s clearly a fact…
I don’t know that most people care at all or even know about this. ChatGPT still far and away has the largest consumer market and brand recognition. What Anthropic has done exceedingly well is work their way into corporations. I have personally seen massive uptake over the last 6 months of regular people in corporations using Claude cowork. They are all genuinely amazed by what it can do for them. OpenAI wants to be…
OpenAI has openings right now for "AI Deployment Engineer"-style positions, which is a role where they embed that employee in one or more customer's businesses. E.g.:
https://openai.com/careers/ai-deployment-engineer-startups-s...
I think this is the right way to go about it. Getting AI integrated well is more of a consulting package than it is a technology/code thing. Just handing a business a model+API will not result in high-quality or long-term relationships. This AI transformation is the most invasive possible thing I can imagine for a business. You really need a human on site to help the other humans across the treacherous organizational and psychological bridges.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How can you say this as if supporting Dario is any better. At the top level of anything there is almost no such thing as a non-asshole. None of them care genuinely about you they just want your money.
The world saw Anthropic take a possibly company-killing risk wrt weaponizing their AI, and are rewarding them for holding to their values, for now at least. It’s not like anyone owes Sam Altman their business just bc their product has become slightly, perhaps temporarily, better
Google put up so little of a fight against the DoW for their use of Gemini that we didn't even hear about it. They are clearly the worst of the evils here, but OpenAI is the one getting all of the negative press.
I never want to hear from developers again that they are not susceptible to marketing. I see meet ups specifically about Claude often. Modern tupperware party. A colleague was convinced Claude is better so we played a game. We used the claude code and codex harness and I implemented some prs they needed with gpt5.5 and opus4.7 and asked them to identify which came from which only from the code. Couldn’t tell. Edit: i…
> We used the claude code and codex harness and I implemented some prs they needed with gpt5.5 and opus4.7 and asked them to identify which came from which only from the code. > Couldn’t tell. Why would you expect them to be able to recognize the signature of a model from a pair of PRs? I don’t understand why you think this is a useful test for anything when we have numerous benchmarks that run 100s of tests on model…
Actually there is a nice body of work by Steven Clarke on cognitive dimensions of notations/APIs and the interaction with developer personalities.
I wonder if the same holds for AI models and harnesses.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We used the claude code and codex harness and I implemented some prs they needed with gpt5.5 and opus4.7 and asked them to identify which came from which only from the code. > Couldn’t tell. Why would you expect them to be able to recognize the signature of a model from a pair of PRs? I don’t understand why you think this is a useful test for anything when we have numerous benchmarks that run 100s of tests on model…
Kind of orthogonal to the discussion, but could you broadly describe the code you're working on that both models are bad at? One thing I'm still struggling with is figuring out what types of code LLMs can vs cannot write.
I never want to hear from developers again that they are not susceptible to marketing. I see meet ups specifically about Claude often. Modern tupperware party. A colleague was convinced Claude is better so we played a game. We used the claude code and codex harness and I implemented some prs they needed with gpt5.5 and opus4.7 and asked them to identify which came from which only from the code. Couldn’t tell. Edit: i…
Claude has an "End Conversation" tool that it can trigger on it's own, forcing your interaction to a close based on it's own feelings towards the conversation. I have no idea how this wasn't the end of Anthropic's positive public perception.
I doubt there is any large demographic of users paying subscription fees for the joy of abusive role play.