...and I still don't get it. I paid for a month of Pro to try it out, and it is consistently and confidently producing subtly broken junk. I had tried doing this before in the past, but gave up because it didn't work well. I thought that maybe this time it would be far along enough to be useful.
The task was relatively simple, and it involved doing some 3d math. The solutions it generated were almost write every time, but critically broken in subtle ways, and any attempt to fix the problems would either introduce new bugs, or regress with old bugs.
I spent nearly the whole day yesterday going back and forth with it, and felt like I was in a mental fog. It wasn't until I had a full night's sleep and reviewed the chat log this morning until I realized how much I was going in circles. I tried prompting a bit more today, but stopped when it kept doing the same crap.
The worst part of this is that, through out all of this, Claude was confidently responding. When I said there was a bug, it would "fix" the bug, and provide a confident explanation of what was wrong... Except it was clearly bullshit because it didn't work.
I still want to keep an open mind. Is anyone having success with these tools? Is there a special way to prompt it? Would I get better results during certain hours of the day?
For reference, I used Opus 4.6 Extended.
Sorry mate, but you drank the AI koolaid from Sam Altman and the other tech oligarchs. The reality is that all of the major AI companies are deep in the red, OpenAI isn't even making a profit with the 200$ subscription.
The only reason people are able to burn thousands of tokens to vibecode their apps is that they don't have to pay the price for that, the companies are. This money will run out soon and then we will see the real cost for the bigger models.
If a subscription for Claude Code costs 500$ or even 1000$, will companies still pay for it or let actual humans do the work? We will see. I seriously doubt it, and I don't want to depend on a subscription-based service to do my work while my skills are atrophying. Thank god my employer doesn't force me to use AI.
This kind of fear-mongering is what I despise most about the whole bubble.
I haven't drank Koolaid. I'm talking from my experience using it in my professional software engineering job where I lead software projects. I've built things that used to take 20 weeks in 1 week with Claude. My employer does not really care about the cost of the tokens. And, when they can have one engineer do 20 weeks of work in 1 week, that to them is actually a cost savings. I already ask myself the question ... Should I give this task to another engineer or just vibecode it myself?
OpenAI may not survive because they do have financial issues from overspending, but that barely matters. The company with the strongest coding LLM is Anthropic and it doesn't sound like they're having financial difficulty. Either way, now that it is clear what is possible, some company will succeed.They have incentives to do it.
Like I said, it will suck for some people, but its hard to deny the reality at this point.
That's ridiculous. You've either been a bad coder even before the AI hype or you're simply lying. I have used these tools and they're not that good or make you that fast - except when you're just merging all of the proposed code blind and hope for the best. I fear for the future colleagues who will have to work with the raging dumpster fire you have created for them.
Oh yes, they have the same problems OpenAI has. Just look into the vibecoding subreddits, you can see many people complaining about excessive rate limits and their models getting dumber. A healthy company wouldn't try to put a cap on the token useage and introduce peak-hour throttling, that's a big warning sign that they're overspending as well.
I only see one person here denying reality. You will be effed in a major way when your employer one day decides that the subscriptions are too expensive or tell you to limit your token useage.
I know it is a big change and will take some time to come to terms with it. But, it is here. I’m not going to argue anymore. It’s pointless.
Did you just pull a random infographic out of your ass without even mentioning the source? I reverse-searched it and it comes from Anthropic, of all places - the guys that run Claude Code.
Forbes took a look at that study, I love this money quote from it:
So yeah, an AI company telling us that AI will theoretically replace our jobs, based on their own study with flawed data - damn, that's trustworthy! /s
At least on this point we agree.