Live data from Hacker News

Eight more months of agents

crawshaw.io

61–70 of 250 posts

Re: Eight more months of agents

#61
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can also ask Claude to review all the code for security issues and code smells, you'd be surprised what it finds. We all write insecure code in our first pass through if we're too focused on getting the proof of concept worked out, security isnt always the very 1st thing coded, maybe its the very next thing, maybe it comes 10 changes later.

> We all write insecure code in our first pass through no, we don't

Yes we do, you don't just start a brand new web project and spit out CORS rules, authentication schemes, roles, etc in one sitting do you? Are you an AI?

Re: Eight more months of agents

#62
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We all write insecure code in our first pass through no, we don't

Yes we do, you don't just start a brand new web project and spit out CORS rules, authentication schemes, roles, etc in one sitting do you? Are you an AI?

> are you an AI?

no, I'm a competent engineer

maybe you've not worked with any

Re: Eight more months of agents

#63
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where are you encountering all this slop code? At my work we use LLMs heavily and I don't see this issue. Maybe I'm just lucky that my colleagues all have Uni degrees in CS and at least a few years experience.

> Maybe I'm just lucky that my colleagues all have Uni degrees in CS and at least a few years experience. That's why. I was using Claude the other day to greenfield a side project and it wanted to do some important logic on the frontend that would have allowed unauthenticated users to write into my database. It was easy to spot for me , because I've been writing software for years, and it only took a single prompt to…

[deleted]

Re: Eight more months of agents

#64

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…

you've always been a Claude Code guy? this has existed less than a year.

Re: Eight more months of agents

#65
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…

I promise you you're just going to continue to light money on fire. Don't fall for this token madness, the bigger your project gets, the less capable the llm will get and the more you spend per request on average. This is literally all marketing tricks by inference providers. Save your money and code it yourself, or use very inexpensive llm methods if you must.

I think we are going to start hearing stories of people going into thousands in CC debt because they were essentially gambling with token usage thinking they would hit some startup jackpot.

Re: Eight more months of agents

#66
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

you've always been a Claude Code guy? this has existed less than a year.

To be fair that still feels like an eternity somehow.

Perhaps AI time is the inverse of Valve time.

Re: Eight more months of agents

#67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Those people are absolutely going to get left in the dust. In the hands of a skilled dev, these things are massive force multipliers.

Re: Eight more months of agents

#68
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…

Facebook's algorithm has picked up on the idea that "I like art". It has subsequently given me more examples of (human-created) art in my feed. Art from comic book artists, art from manga-style creators, "weird art", even a make-up artist who painted a scene from Where the Wild Things Are on her face.

I like this. What's more, while AI-generated art has a characteristic sameyness to it, the human-produced art stands out in its originality. It has character and soul. Even if it's bad! AI slop has made the human-created stuff seem even more striking by comparison. The market for human art isn't going anywhere, just like the audience for human-played chess went nowhere after Deep Blue. I think people will pay a premium for it, just to distinguish themselves from the slop. The same is true of writing and especially music. I know of no one who likes listening to AI-generated music. Even Sabrina Carpenter would raise less objection.

The same, I'm afraid, cannot be said for software—because there is little value for human expression in the code itself. Code is—almost entirely—strictly utilitarian. So we are now at an inflection point where LLMs can generate and validate code that's nearly as good, if not better, than what we can produce on our own. And to not make use of them is about as silly as Mel Kaye still punching in instruction opcodes in hex into the RPC-4000, while his colleagues make use of these fancy new things called "compilers". They're off building unimaginably more complex software than they could before, but hey, he gets his pick of locations on the rotating memory drum!

I'm one of the nonexistent anti-LLMers when it comes to software. I hate talking to a clanker, whose training data set I don't even have access to let alone the ability to understand how my input affects its output, just to do what I do normally with the neural net I've carried around in my skull and trained extensively for this very purpose. I like working directly with code. Code is not just a product for me; it is a medium of thought and expression. It is a formalized notation of a process that I can use to understand and shape that process.

But with the right agentic loops, LLMs can just do more, faster. There's really no point in resisting. The marginal value of what I do has just dropped to zero.

Re: Eight more months of agents

#69
post #44
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I think this is an interesting point, my one area of disagreement is that there is no "anti-LLM sentiment" in the programming community. Sure, plenty of folks expressing skepticism or disagreement are doing so from a genuine place, but just in reading this site and a few email newsletters I get I can say that there is a non-trivial percent in the programming world who are adamantly opposed to LLMs/AI. When I see comm…

But there's a difference. Being opposed to AI-generated art/music/writing is valid because humans still contribute something extraordinarily meaningful when they do it themselves. There's no market for AI-generated music, and AI-generated art and writing tends to get called out right away when it's detected. People want the human expression in human-generated art, and the AI stuff is a weak placeholder at best.

For software the situation is different. Being opposed to LLM-generated software is just batshit crazy at this point. The value that LLMs provide to the process makes learning to use them, objectively, an absolute must; otherwise you are simply wasting time and money. Eric S. Raymond put it something like "If you call yourself a software engineer, you have no excuse not to be using these tools. Get your thumb out of your ass and learn."

Re: Eight more months of agents

#70
I see a lot of people here saying things like:

>ah, they're so dumb, they don't get it, the anti-LLM people

This is one of the reasons I see AI failing in the short term. If I call you an idiot, are you more or less likely to be open minded and try what I'm selling? AI isn't making money, 95% of companies are failing with AI

https://fortune.com/2025/08/18/mit-report-95-percent-generat...

I mean, your AIs might be a lot more powerful if it was generating money, but that's not happening. I guess being condescending to the 95% of potential buyers isn't really working out.

Post reply on HN