This fact is opening the floodgates of low-end products, which are somehow better than nothing, but are embarrassing to use.

▲

vntok 13 hours ago | parent [-]

True, however as these products have been designed and coded by LLMs from the ground up in 2025+, they are generally using modern (typed even) languages, the latest version of third party libraries, usually have documentation of sorts... sometimes they even have test suites.

As such, they can often be improved as easily as one can prompt, which is much faster and easier than before. Notably in the FOSS world where one had to ask the maintainer, get ghosted for a year and have them go back with a "close: wontfix (too tedious)".

	▲	bagacrap 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I've tried very earnestly to use opus 4.5 to get rid of some backlog tasks that were too tedious to do manually. It turns out that they're still extremely tedious because I have to make every single non trivial decision for the model, unless I don't care one iota about the long term sustainability of the code base. And by long term, I mean more than a week. They're good for saving keystrokes or doing fuzzy searches for me. "Design"? No, that is an anthropomorphism.
	▲	nine_k 10 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Better languages do not necessarily mean better architectural decisions, or even better performance, unless the humans pressure for that and burn tokens on that. With no engineer in the room, more technical issues will be left unnoticed and unaddressed. Compare it to visual arts. With a guidance form an artist, AI tools can help create wonderful pictures. Without such guidance, or at least expert prompting, a typical one-shot image from Gemini is... well, at best recognizable as such.