That's assuming the model is actually as good as they say it is. Given the amount of AI researchers over the past 3 years claiming supernatural capability from the LLM they have built, my bayesian skepticism is through the roof.
replydon't confuse bayesian skepticism with plain old contrarian bias. a true bayesian updates their priors, I'd say this is an appropriate time to do so. also don't confuse what they sell with what they have internally.
replyAnthropic has behaved the least like this of the AI companies.
replyThey made a claim that 100% of code would be AI generated in a year, over a year ago.
replyThat was a prediction. It was not a claim of their current capabilities. If that is the one you reach for then I feel my point has been made.
replyThey were right, it's hit 100% at a number of large tech companies. (They missed their initial prediction of 90% 6 months ago, because the models then available publicly weren't capable enough.)
replyPlease tell me those companies so I can find alternatives. I'm using AI every day and there's no way I would trust it do that.
replyThe transition is pretty complete at e.g. Google and Meta, IIUC. Definitely whoever builds the AI tools you're using every day isn't writing code by hand.
reply