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

GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

701–710 of 742 posts

Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic

#701

Post by bongodongobob »

Bjartr wrote: post #464
bongodongobob wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it takes almost no cognitive energy, quite a while. Even if it's a little slower than what I can do, I don't care because I didn't have to focus deeply on it and have plenty of energy left to keep on pushing.

I'm constantly having to go back and tell the AI about every mistake it makes and remind it not to reintroduce mistakes that were previously fixed. "no cognitive energy" is definitely not how I would describe that experience.

Sounds like the context window is getting pruned. Start a new chat fresh after you make significant changes.

Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic

#702

Post by thesz »

0xFACEFEED wrote: post #329
ianbutler wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm actually very curious why AI use is such a bi-modal experience. I've used AI to move multi thousand line codebases between languages. I've created new apps from scratch with it. My theory is the willingness to baby sit and the modality. I'm perfectly fine telling the tool I use its errors and working side by side with it like it was another person. At the end of the day it can belt out lines of code faster than I…

As a programmer of over 20 years - this is terrifying. I'm willing to accept that I just have "get off my lawn" syndrome or something. But the idea of letting an LLM write/move large swaths of code seems so incredibly irresponsible. Whenever I sit down to write some code, be it a large implementation or a small function, I think about what other people (or future versions of myself) will struggle with when interactin…

You are absolutely right.

AI is used to generate new code, not to reduce its size through rewrite [1].

[1] https://www.folklore.org/Negative_2000_Lines_Of_Code.html

The code is always a burden, a legacy. To support it, one need to look after it, take care of it, bear it's weight.

I have 35+ years of experience on my shoulders. I always celebrate when I can reduce code - and, recently, I do that more and more often, being a support person for a large code base with a 20+ years of history.

PS You were answering a comment that brags about migrating multithousand LOC code bases from language to the other. Recently I had to review a file that is more than (metric) megabyte (10^6 bytes) and more than 32 thousands LOC in size. I need to find a way to apply a fix for a problem triggered by single statement in several thousands (more that 1M of LOCs) of test cases.

Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic

#703

Post by simonw »

scott01 wrote: post #610
simonw wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's my "How I use LLMs and ChatGPT" series: https://simonwillison.net/series/using-llms/ Also relevant is my ai-assisted-programming tag: https://simonwillison.net/tags/ai-assisted-programming/

Sorry, it’s a bit hard to understand from your blog. I’m a bit dyslexic, so there’s a chance I’ve mussed something obvious, but I couldn’t find any examples beyond ‘explain this short snippet’. Also, are your posts AI assisted? I find it hard to read. I’ve tried asking ChatGPT questions about how a large codebase works, what entities should I use to implement some feature, etc. After a couple hours I realised the cha…

In both cases there I linked to index pages that reference several years of accumulated content. None of that content is written by AI (with the exception of an occasional sentence completed by GitHub Copilot while I was typing).

I suggest reading this article for a recent example of how I use LLMs for code: https://simonwillison.net/2024/Oct/18/openai-audio/

Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic

#704

Post by simonw »

th0ma5 wrote: post #530
simonw wrote: post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's my "How I use LLMs and ChatGPT" series: https://simonwillison.net/series/using-llms/ Also relevant is my ai-assisted-programming tag: https://simonwillison.net/tags/ai-assisted-programming/

These examples are not much different than tutorial regurgitation imo. I would not pass this off as solving the problems that programmers have in practice, imo.

Did you dismiss two years of my accumulated writing about LLMs as "tutorial regurgitation"?

Maybe you clicked the link to my series of posts that are in chronological order - https://simonwillison.net/series/using-llms/ - looked at the very first one about trying out GPT-3 from June 2022 and stopped reading.

I probably shouldn't share that link any more!

Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic

#705

Post by hhdhdbdb »

kamaal wrote: post #636
hhdhdbdb wrote: post #466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dont see a young/old divide when it comes to AI. Altough there is a young/old divide in familial responsibilies and willingness to be a chip on the VC's roulette table.

There is a young/old divide. There was a similar divide in the 2000s when Google Search got ubiquitous and writing code got easier than ever. I know a lot of people quit to become 'managers' because they didn't want to fix code which most of the times was being copied from the internet and pasted. Similar arguments on correctness, verbosity and even future maintainability were made. Everybody knows how that went. Mil…

I must be the exception! A big survey on this would be interesting to go from anecdotes to data.

Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic

#706

Post by andrei_says_ »

wruza wrote: post #442
AIorNot wrote: post #427

Reviewing these conversations is like listening to horse and buggy manufacturers pooh-poohing automobiles: 1. they will scare the horses. a good team of horses is no match for funky 'automobile' 2. how will they be able to deal with our muddy, messy roads 3. their engines are unreliable and prone to breaking down stranding you in the middle and having to do it yourself.. 4. their drivers cant handle the speed, too ma…

A reminder that we basically built cities around the cars, cause they still need fuel, break and drown in the mud. What is your similar plan for LLMs? Analogies always end somewhere, I’m just curious where yours does.

I guess we build a world where being catastrophically and confidently wrong about many things is completely normalized.

Don’t we already see a shift in this direction?

C suite is being sold the story that this new tech will let them fire x% of their workforce. The workforce says the tech is not capable of replacing people.

C suite doesn’t have the expertise to understand why and how exactly the tech is not ready but does understand people and suspects that their workforces warnings are just a self preservation impulse.

C suite also gets huge bonuses if they reduce cost.

So, they are very strongly encouraged to believe the story and the ones actually doing the work and knowing the difference are left to watch the companies products get destroyed.

Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic

#707

Post by elliotto »

simonw wrote: post #704
th0ma5 wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These examples are not much different than tutorial regurgitation imo. I would not pass this off as solving the problems that programmers have in practice, imo.

Did you dismiss two years of my accumulated writing about LLMs as "tutorial regurgitation"? Maybe you clicked the link to my series of posts that are in chronological order - https://simonwillison.net/series/using-llms/ - looked at the very first one about trying out GPT-3 from June 2022 and stopped reading. I probably shouldn't share that link any more!

I'm a big fan of your blog simonw, and it's interesting to see how a few of the people you've responded to here aren't receptive at all to your responses.

I have become somewhat convinced that the 'ai doesn't help with programming crowd' is a little bit obtuse / entirely unwilling to experiment with new tools. It seems too much of a coincidence to see the same crowd that you've responded to struggle to perform basic website navigation and take anything away from your blog posts.

Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic

#708

Post by ukuina »

ukuina wrote: post #517

Wait, does this provide UNLIMITED completions via Claude 3.5 Sonnet for a single $10/month subscription? Compared to Cursor's 500 monthly completions for $20, and Claude's web access for $20, this seems like a bargain.

So I subscribed to test this out.

While Claude is not yet available, there are tight rate limits on o1-preview (~10 messages in a 15 minute window); this is low enough that it hampers anything close to "flow".

You can't switch models inside a single request, and it does not follow Aider's clear split (in Architect mode) between "plan" and "implement". If Copilot Editor decides to start implementing file changes alongside its response, you can hit your entire o1-preview cap in a single request-response pair.

When it does work, it's like Aider inside your IDE.

Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic

#709

Post by CaptainFever »

_heimdall wrote: post #700
CaptainFever wrote: post #671

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the legal precedence comes out as "yes, it is legal", as many countries have already done (e.g. Japan), would GP really change their mind and become okay with it? (Note: the Copilot lawsuit have also mostly been dismissed, so this is already close to reality.) I doubt it. I think the GP will still be concerned about it, and would petition to change the law. So it has nothing to do with the legal precedence either,…

Legal precedent doesn't generally cross national borders like that, unless you're talking specifically about international law and precedent set by bodies like the UN or ICC. When it comes to petitioning to change the law, that's a step further than precedent. Precedent is really just legal cases that had to be hashed out because the laws either don't exist or aren't clear. A person would be well within their right t…

I should clarify, I meant "will the GP be less concerned if the precedent says training is legal in the U.S.?" The Japan one was just an example of what could happen.

My point was that, if the GP will disagree with such a precedent, then their worry goes further than mere legalities. Specifically, "there isn't clear legal precedent yet whether training models is an acceptable use of licensed work" felt like a non-sequitur to me, because it is unlikely they would care about the legal precedent.

Re: GitHub cuts AI deals with Google, Anthropic

#710

Post by KingMob »

tanelpoder wrote: post #170
pseudosavant wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use both Claude and ChatGPT/GPT-4o a lot. Claude, the model, definitely is 'better' than GPT-4o. But OpenAI provides a much more capable app in ChatGPT and an easier development platform. I would absolutely choose to use Claude as my model with ChatGPT if that happened (yes, I know it won't). ChatGPT as an app is just so far ahead: code interpreter, web search/fetch, fluid voice interaction, Custom GPTs, image gene…

Are there any good 3rd-party native frontend apps for Claude (on MacOS)? I mean something like ChatGPTs app, not an editor. I guess one option would be to just run Claude iPad app on MacOS.

It's not native, but I've been pretty happy with big-AGI. It's just an `npm run` away. I don't use it for coding tasks, though.

Its most unique feature is its "beam" facility, which allows you to send a query to multiple APIs simultaneously (if you want to cross-check) and even combine the answer.

Post reply on HN