> I can't find a single open source codebase, actively used in production, and primarily maintained and developed with AI.

That's because using AI to write code is a poor application of LLM AIs. LLMs are better suited to summary, advice, and reflection than forced into a Rube Goldberg Machine. Use your favorite LLM as a Socratic advisor, but not as a coder, and certainly not as an unreliable worker.

The entire hype for LLMs is that they can *do* anything. Even if only writing code, that could justify their hype. If LLMs mean Grammarly is now a lot better (and offered by big tech) then it’ll be very disappointing (economically speaking)

I support this comment. AI for coding does still involve much prodding and redirecting in my limited experience. Try getting Claude to produce even a simple SVG for a paper is a struggle in my experience.

But for helping me as a partner in neurophilosophy conversations Claude is unrivaled even compared to my neurophilosophy colleagues—speed and the responsivness is impossible to beat. LLMs are at pushing me to think harder. They provides the wall against which to bounce ideas, and those bounces often come from surprising and helpful angles.

It's absolutely hilarious reading all these "you're holding it wrong" arguments because every time I find one it contradicts the previous ones.

> That's because using AI to write code is a poor application of LLM AIs

Then why is that exact usecase being talked about ad nauseam by many many many "influencers", including "big names" in the industry? Why is that exact usecase then advertised by leading companies in the industry?

Agreed. That argument they made was a straw-man which doesn't really pertain to where LLMs are being leveraged today.

> Use your favorite LLM as a Socratic advisor

Can you give an example of what you mean by this?