Live data from Hacker News

Eight more months of agents

crawshaw.io

51–60 of 250 posts

Re: Eight more months of agents

#51
post #28

I have no problem with experienced senior devs using agents to write good code faster. What I have a problem with is inexperienced "vibecoders" who don't care to learn and instead use agents to write awful buggy code that will make the product harder to build on even for the agents. It used to be that lack of a basic understanding of the system was a barrier for people, but now it's not, so we're flooded with code wr…

the number of experienced, senior programmers though, who are in “anti-LLM” camp, is still fairly staggering.

I mean when the tag line is "this will replace senior engineers and you, the senior engineer, must be forced to use it"

Then yeah, it makes sense.

Re: Eight more months of agents

#52

The author is correct in that agents are becoming more and more capable and that you don't need the IDE to the same extent, but I don't see that as good. I find that IDE-based agentic programming actually encourages you to read and understand your codebase as opposed to CLI-based workflows. It's so much easier to flip through files, review the changes it made, or highlight a specific function and give it to the agent…

The other thing about non-agent workflows is they’re much, much less compute intensive. This is going to matter.

Re: Eight more months of agents

#53
post #13

But if you try some penny-saving cheap model like Sonnet [..bad things..]. [Better] pay through the nose for Opus. After blowing $800 of my bootstrap startup funds for Cursor with Opus for myself in a very productive January I figured I had to try to change things up... so this month I'm jumping between Claude Code and Cursor, sometimes writing the plans and having the conversation in Cursor and dump the implementati…

Just use Codex 5.3 in codex cli, the $20/mo plan is basically limitless at least for me and I keep reasoning efforts high. You can enjoy it while it lasts, OpenAI is being very liberal with their limits because of CC eating their lunch rn.

Yeah, I can’t recommend gpt-5.3-codex enough, it’s great! I’ve been using it with the new macOS app and I’m impressed. I’ve always been a Claude Code guy and I find myself using codex more and more. Opus is still much nicer explaining issues and walking me through implementations but codex is faster (even with xhigh effort) and gets the job done 95% of the time.

I was spending unholy amounts of money and tokens (subsidized cloud credits tho) forcing Opus for everything but I’m very happy with this new setup. I’ve also experimented with OpenCode and their Zen subscription to test Kimi K2.5 an similar models and they also seem like a very good alternative for some tasks.

What I cannot stand tho is using sonnet directly (it’s fine as a subagent), I’ve found it to be hard to control and doesn’t follow detailed instructions.

Re: Eight more months of agents

#54

In the past couple days I've become less skeptical of the capabilities of LLMs and now more alarmed by them, contra the author. I think if we as a society continue to accept the development of LLMs and the control of them by the major AI companies there will be massively negative repercussions. And I don't mean repercussions like "a rogue AI will destroy humanity" per se, but these things will potentially cause massi…

There are some good things here: First, we currently have 4 frontier labs, and a bunch of 2nd tier ones following. The fact that we don't have just oAI or just Anthropic or just Google is good in the general sense, I would say. The 4 labs racing each other and trading SotA status for ~a few weeks is good for the end consumer. They keep each other honest and keep the prices down. Imagine if Anthropic could charge 60$…

I'm not just concerned about control by one company, I'm concerned by control for the profit motive, and probably concerned about the wisdom of using these things for anything except extremely limited use cases (breakthrough scientific research, etc.). I think tech people have a bad tendency of viewing this through the lens of platform wars type stakes, and there are much bigger problems with AI. The fact that an alarming number of ex-and-current Anthropic people I've met think the world is going to end is something we should take heed of!

The AI labs started down this path using the Manhattan Project as a metaphor and guess what? It's a good metaphor and we should embrace most of the wider implications of that (though I'd love to avoid all the MAD/cold war bullshit this time).

Re: Eight more months of agents

#55
post #25

I don't trust the idea of "not getting", "not understanding", or "being out of touch" with anti-LLM (or pro-LLM) sentiment. There is nothing complicated about this divide. The pros and cons are both as plain as anything has ever been. You can disagree - even strongly - with either side. You can't "not understand".

The negative impacts of generative AI are most sharply being felt by "creatives" (artists, writers, musicians, etc), and the consumers in those markets. If the OP here is 1. a programmer 2. who works solely with other programmers and 3. who is "on the grind", mostly just consuming non-fiction blog-post content related to software development these days, rather than paying much attention to what's currently happening…

>"Anti-LLM sentiment" within software development is nearly non-existent

This is certainly untrue. I want to say "obviously", which means that maybe I am misunderstanding you. Below are some examples of negative sentiments programmers have - can you explain why you are not counting these?

NOTE: I am not presenting these as an "LLMs are bad" argument. My own feelings go both ways. There is a lot that's great about LLMs, and I don't necessarily agree with every word I've written below - some of it is just my paraphrasing of what other people say. I'm only listing examples of what drives existing anti-LLM sentiment in programmers.

1. Job loss, loss of income, or threat thereof

These two are exacerbated by the pace of change, since so many people already spent their lives and money establishing themselves in the career and can't realistically pivot without becoming miserable - this is the same story for every large, fast change - though arguably this one is very large and very fast even by those standards. Lots of tech leadership is focusing even more than they already were on cheap contractors, and/or pushing employees for unrealistic productivity increases. I.e. it's exacerbating the "fast > good" problem, and a lot of leadership is also overestimating how far it reduces the barrier to creating things, as opposed to mostly just speeding up a person's existing capabilities. Some leadership is also using the apparent loss of job security as leverage beyond salary suppression (even less proportion of remote work allowed, more surveillance, worse office conditions, etc).

2. Happiness loss (in regards to the job itself, not all the other stuff in this list)

This is regarding people who enjoy writing/designing programs but don't enjoy directing LLMs; or who don't enjoy debugging the types of mistakes LLMs tend to make, as opposed to the types of mistakes that human devs tend to make. For these people, it's like their job was forcibly changed to a different, almost unrelated job, which can be miserable depending on why you were good at - or why you enjoyed - the old job.

3. Uncertainty/skepticism

I'm pushing back on your dismissal of this one as "not anti-LLM sentiment" - the comparison doesn't make sense. If I was forced to only review junior dev code instead of ever writing my own code or reviewing experienced dev code, I would be unhappy. And I love teaching juniors! And even if we ignore the subset of cases where it doesn't do a good job or assume it will soon be senior-level for every use case, this still overlaps with the above problem: The mistakes it makes are not like the mistakes a human makes. For some people, it's more unnatural/stressful to keep your eyes peeled for the kinds of mistakes it makes. For these people, it's a shift away from objective, detail-oriented, controlled, concrete thinking; away from the feeling of making something with your hands; and toward a more wishy-washy creation experience that can create a feeling of lack of control.

4. Expertise loss

A lot of positive outcomes with LLMs come from being already experienced. Some argue this will be eroded - both for new devs and existing experienced devs.

5. The training data ownership/morality angle

Re: Eight more months of agents

#56
> Along the way I have developed a programming philosophy I now apply to everything: the best software for an agent is whatever is best for a programmer.

Not a plug but really that’s exactly why we’re building sandboxes for agents with local laptop quality. Starting with remote xcode+sim sandboxes for iOS, high mem sandbox with Android Emulator on GPU accel for Android.

No machine allocation but composable sandboxes that make up a developer persona’s laptop.

If interested, a quick demo here https://www.loom.com/share/c0c618ed756d46d39f0e20c7feec996d

muvaf[at]limrun[dot]com

Re: Eight more months of agents

#57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just use Codex 5.3 in codex cli, the $20/mo plan is basically limitless at least for me and I keep reasoning efforts high. You can enjoy it while it lasts, OpenAI is being very liberal with their limits because of CC eating their lunch rn.

Yeah, I can’t recommend gpt-5.3-codex enough, it’s great! I’ve been using it with the new macOS app and I’m impressed. I’ve always been a Claude Code guy and I find myself using codex more and more. Opus is still much nicer explaining issues and walking me through implementations but codex is faster (even with xhigh effort) and gets the job done 95% of the time. I was spending unholy amounts of money and tokens (subs…

Out of curiosity, what’s your flow? Do you have codex write plans to markdown files? Just chat? What languages or frameworks do you use?

I’m an avid cursor user (with opus), and have been trying alternatives recently. Codex has been an immense letdown. I think I was too spoiled by cursor’s UX and internal planning prompt.

It’s incredibly slow, produces terribly verbose and over-complicated code (unless I use high or xhigh, which are even slower), and missed a lot of details. Python/django and react frontend.

For the first time I felt like I could relate to those people who say it doesn’t make them faster,” because they have to keep fixing the agent’s shot, never felt that with opus 4.5 and 4.6 and cursor

Re: Eight more months of agents

#58
post #48
post #28

I have no problem with experienced senior devs using agents to write good code faster. What I have a problem with is inexperienced "vibecoders" who don't care to learn and instead use agents to write awful buggy code that will make the product harder to build on even for the agents. It used to be that lack of a basic understanding of the system was a barrier for people, but now it's not, so we're flooded with code wr…

We're in a transition phase, but this will shake out in the near future. In the non-professional space, poorly built vibecoded apps simply won't last, for any number of reasons. When it comes to professional devs, this is a problem that is solved by a combination of tooling, process, and management: (1) Tooling to enable better evaluation of generated code and its adherence to conventions and norms (2) Process to imp…

The unfortunate reality is that (1) and (2) is what many, many engineers would like to do, but management is going EXACTLY in the opposite direction: go faster! Go faster! Why are you spending time on these things

Re: Eight more months of agents

#59

I don't trust the idea of "not getting", "not understanding", or "being out of touch" with anti-LLM (or pro-LLM) sentiment. There is nothing complicated about this divide. The pros and cons are both as plain as anything has ever been. You can disagree - even strongly - with either side. You can't "not understand".

> There is nothing complicated about this divide [...] You can't "not understand" I beg to differ. There are a whole lot of folks with astonishingly incomplete understanding about all the facts here who are going to continue to make things very, very complicated. Disagreement is meaningless when the relevant parties are not working from the same assumption of basic knowledge.

Bolstering your point, check out the comments in this thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/1qy9dcs/who_has_compl...

There’s a lot of unwillingness to even attempt to try the tools.

Re: Eight more months of agents

#60
post #28

I have no problem with experienced senior devs using agents to write good code faster. What I have a problem with is inexperienced "vibecoders" who don't care to learn and instead use agents to write awful buggy code that will make the product harder to build on even for the agents. It used to be that lack of a basic understanding of the system was a barrier for people, but now it's not, so we're flooded with code wr…

the number of experienced, senior programmers though, who are in “anti-LLM” camp, is still fairly staggering.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN