But the trend line is less ambiguous, models got better year over year, much much better.

I don't dispute that the situation is rapidly evolving. It is certainly possible that we could achieve AGI in the near future. It is also entirely possible that we might not. Claims such as that AGI is close or that we will soon be replacing developers entirely are pure hype.

When someone says something to the effect of "LLMs are on the verge of replacing developers any day now" it is perfectly reasonable to respond "I tried it and it came up with crap". If we were actually near that point you wouldn't have gotten crap back when you tried it for yourself.

▲

jerkstate 9 hours ago | parent [-]

There's a big difference between "I tried it and it produced crap" and "it will replace developers entirely any day now"

People who use this stuff everyday know that people who are still saying "I tried it and it produced crap" just don't know how to use it correctly. Those developers WILL get replaced - by ones who know how to use the tool.

	▲	fc417fc802 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> Those developers WILL get replaced - by ones who know how to use the tool. Now _that_ I would believe. But note how different "those who fail to adapt to this new tool will be replaced" is from "the vast majority will be replaced by this tool itself". If someone had said that six (give or take) months ago I would have dismissed it as hype. But there have been at least a few decently well documented AI assisted projects done by veteran developers that have made the front page recently. Importantly they've shown clear and undeniable results as opposed to handwaving and empty aspirations. They've also been up front about the shortcomings of the new tool.