[nucatus]

I can’t stand all this hype anymore. They’re pushing it so hard that I’m starting to develop an AI phobia. If it were really that good, they’d already be making big money off it. But it’s not — it just needs your data (codebase?), supposedly to make it better. The fact is, at least they’ve gotten halfway there, which from their perspective, is sweet. All the AI labs are actually losing a ton of $$$ to this AI race, but the data, ohh yeah! Let's go, baby!

I am strictly talking about the coding capabilities of the LLM, and not their core LLM capabilities, which they genuinely excel at.

[jmathai]

I'm pretty pragmatic and resist AI hype. However, I am in the camp that the tools we've built do not maximize the potential of the LLMs we have today.

I see 2 things happening in parallel.

1) Tools on existing LLMs continue to improve (cursor -> claude code).

2) The LLMs themselves improve which makes existing tooling better and results in new tooling to take advantage of the improvements.

I'm not sure when I see either of these slowing down and they've been accelerating at a very rapid pace. Perhaps when the funding dries up.

I think that's the question but I believe if we don't have any more LLM improvements that we still have a couple years of tooling improvements using what's there today.

I'm sort of surprised that coding is a leading use case but do not see any reason it would not spread to other industries (what the OP is saying).