> Including how it looks at the surrounding code and patterns.

Citation needed. Even with specific examples, “follow the patterns from the existing tests”, etc copilot (gpt 5) still insists on generating tests using the wrong methods (“describe” and “it” in a codebase that uses “suite” and “test”).

An intern, even an intern with a severe cognitive disability, would not be so bad at pattern following.

▲

formerly_proven 3 days ago | parent [-]

Do you think smart companies seeking to leverage AI effectively in their engineering orgs are using the 20$ slopify subscription from Microsoft?

You get what you pay for.

▲

n8cpdx 3 days ago | parent [-]

Every time a new model or tool comes out, the AI boosters love to say that n-1 was garbage and finally AI vibecoding is the real deal and it will make you 10x more productive.

Except six months ago n-1 was n and the boosters were busy ruining their credibility saying that their garbage tier AI was world class and making them 10x more productive.

Today’s leading world-class agentic model is tomorrow’s horrible garbage tier slop generator that was patently never good enough to be taken seriously.

This has been going on for years, the pattern is obvious and undeniable.

	▲	formerly_proven 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I can obviously only speak for myself, but I've tried AI coding tools from time to time and with Opus 4.5 I have for the first time the impression that it is genuinely helpful for a variety of tasks. I've never previously claimed that I find them useful. And 10x more productive? Certainly not, even if it would improve development speed 10000x I wouldn't be 10x more productive overall since not even half of my time is directed towards development efforts.