[uejfiweun]

All you've said needs the qualifier - "for now!" Look at the trend line. It's clear that if they're not yet at the level of being "good enough" for coding, they will be soon. Sensationalist headlines aside, we all need to be preparing for a world where open models can do pretty much any software tasks you need them to.

[krige]

https://xkcd.com/605/

[Levitz]

Would you bet money that they won't be good enough for coding in, say, one year?

Just as a call to actual consideration, would that seem a smart bet to do? Because I find it really hard to justify dismissal at this point, sure I don't think these things will improve forever and ever, but come on. The goofy Will Smith spaghetti is a little over 3 years old. Three years. Look at where we are at.

[uejfiweun]

This is such a smooth-brain reply, dude. The capability literally exists, today. You're telling me that it's just SO fantastical that people will be able to catch up? Give me a break. Anthropic and OpenAI are not staffed by demigods.

[krige]

That's a whole separate argument you've invented here. And if the capability exists today, why did you talk about some nebulous future?

[uejfiweun]

Is it really so hard to understand that open models are behind and yet they are also continually improving and way better than they were a year ago? Like I'm not sure what your point is here. Are you purposely playing dumb to troll people or something?