[TGower]

"AI coding is so much better now that any skepticism from 6 months ago is invalid" has been the refrain for the last 3 years. After the first few cycles of checking it out and realizing that it's still not meeting your quality bar, it's pretty reasonable to dismiss the AI hype crowd.

[dmurvihill]

It's gotten ok now. Just spent a day with Claude for the first time in a while. Demanded strict TDD and implemented one test at a time. Might have been faster, hard to say for sure. Result was good.

[simonsarris]

I think we have a real inflection point now. I try it a bit every year and was always underwhelmed. Halfway through this year was the first time it really impressed me. I now use Claude Code.

[stemlord]

But Claude Code costs money. You really want to introduce a critical dependency into your workflow that will simultaneously atrophy your skills and charge you subscription fees?

[sothatsit]

A year ago I could get o1-mini to write tests some of the time that I would then need to fix. Now I can get Opus 4.5 to do fairly complicated refactors with no mistakes.

These tools are seriously starting to become actually useful, and I’m sorry but people aren’t lying when they say things have changed a lot over the last year.

[TGower]

It might even be true this time, but there is no real mystery why many aren't inclined to invest more time figuring it out for themselves every few months. No need for the author of the original article to reach for "they are protecting their fragile egos" style of explanation.

[raincole]

Because it has been true for the last 3 years. Just because a saying is repeated a lot doesn't mean it's wrong.