Basically, they are the same, they are all LLMs. They all have similar limitations. They all produce "hallucinations". They can also sometimes be useful. And they are all way overhyped.

▲

trenchpilgrim 7 days ago | parent [-]

The amount of misconceptions in this comment are quite profound.

Copilot isn't an LLM, for a start. You _combine_ it wil a selection of LLMs. And it absolutely has severe limitations compared to something like Claude Code in how it can interact with the programming environment.

"Hallucinations" are far less of a problem with software that grounds the AI to the truth in your compiler, diagnostics, static analysis, a running copy of your project, runnning your tests, executing dev tools in your shell, etc.

▲

leptons 7 days ago | parent [-]

>Copilot isn't an LLM, for a start

You're being overly pedantic here and moving goalposts. Copilot (for coding) without an LLM is pretty useless.

I stand by my assertion that these tools are all basically the same fundamental tech - LLMs.

▲

noidesto 6 days ago | parent | next [-]

> I stand by my assertion that these tools are all basically the same fundamental tech - LLMs.

Over generalizing. The synergy between the LLM and the client (cursor, Claude code, copilot, etc) make a huge difference in results.

▲

phillipcarter 6 days ago | parent | prev [-]

This is like saying every web app is basically the same fundamental tech - databases.

	▲	trenchpilgrim 6 days ago \| parent [-]
		Or that writing Python with notepad.exe and Jupyter are fundamentally the same.