That'll take time. In the AI bubble, nobody has time. Latest SOTA model should have came out last week, and the latest harness 5 days ago.

Nobody has time to optimize for anything. They can run as fast as they can and regularly catch fire on the fly.

It's dangerous.

▲

cyanydeez 2 days ago | parent [-]

well, I wouldn't say they dont have time.

It's probably better to say: they're dogfooding the cheapest route to the quickfix the agent provides.

I remember a year ago we asked "Where are all the great products AI should be delivering" and now the answer is: tons and tons of AI products to consume AI, in a snake eating it's tail.

I've stopped chasing the dragon for the moment so I can push out real products.

▲

bayindirh 2 days ago | parent [-]

That's a perfectly valid probability as well.

I'm deliberately late to the game. I don't use any of the agents, harnesses, code generation, and what I see is mostly slop.

Currently, for my use case, AI is a tool for finding entrances to rabbit holes with solid references, so I can take it from there and continue digging myself.

I believe instead of diving to the deep end head-first, one needs to regulate their usage of AI, so they can get what they can get and accomplish real work with these nuggets.

▲

cyanydeez 2 days ago | parent [-]

I agree, I started local-only about february of this year.

I ended up with opencode and deer-flow. Deer-flow does wonders in the research and development. Opencode will produce whatever pratfalls you want.

I put out a raspberry-pi based control system replacing a expensive $$$$ PLC system with all the trimmings. Portions of it I haven't a clue how it works, but because it's not complex, I don't really care.

Prior to this, I was essentially doing the same kind of console.log/print programming, and just visually/interactively verifying the stuff I did. But there were never docs and occasionally I tried out how TDD felt, and it felt funcitonally a non-starter. I'm not a csci student.

As such, AI feels a lot more "at home" to my development than any other tools I've come across. Whenever I see an IDE that pops up method selection, etc, my entire brain breaks because like an LLM, i'm just streaming in and need to litterally see the code block or flow I'm working on. So i've hated most complex IDEs.

▲

bayindirh 2 days ago | parent [-]

> Whenever I see an IDE that pops up method selection, etc, my entire brain breaks because like an LLM, i'm just streaming in and need to litterally see the code block or flow I'm working on. So i've hated most complex IDEs.

Interesting, our minds work completely different, then. I can generally keep most of the plan of the machinery I'm building, and working with full-blown IDEs is much more comfortable for me since it allows a birds-eye-view of the project I'm working on.

OTOH, I can't see myself attaching a LLM to my IDE and meddle with my code any time soon.

	▲	cyanydeez 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		yeah, I started mostly with copy paste in the idea: duplicate this component and rename it to X because it largely did the same thing. Eventually, I just use vscode to get a better picture, but i can get deer flow to pump out scaffolds, then tidy them up in open code. It's about equal to what I can accomplish, but the current local LLMs when properly guided, do a lot better with complex dependency errors. So what I give up in my little programming bubble, I gain from not banging my head against some stupid 3rd party error or speghetti even driven madness. They still don't get passed the level of complexity I know I can, but doing mostly greenfield or patches to open source, I spend a lot of time just restructuring. With all that said, I'm probably in the same place as all the other AI users: not that much ROI in the bag.