Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    Cognition (Devin AI) to Acquire Windsurf

    (cognition.ai)
    502 points alazsengul | 13 comments | 14 Jul 25 18:07 UTC | HN request time: 0.481s | source | bottom
    Show context
    pm90 ◴[14 Jul 25 19:38 UTC] No.44564397[source]▶
    I think the amount of turmoil around these deals is giving more weight to the possibility that we’re in a massive bubble thats quite divorced from any kind of fundamentals. Sooner or later the bubbles gonna burst.
    replies(13): >>44564436 #>>44564444 #>>44564507 #>>44564837 #>>44564856 #>>44564871 #>>44565061 #>>44566422 #>>44568840 #>>44570092 #>>44570792 #>>44571345 #>>44572790 #
    nikcub ◴[14 Jul 25 20:26 UTC] No.44564871[source]▶
    > divorced from any kind of fundamentals

    Anthropic ARR went $1B -> $4B in the first half of this year. They're getting my $200 a month and it's easily the best money I spend. There's definitely something there.

    replies(22): >>44564952 #>>44564962 #>>44565035 #>>44565278 #>>44565374 #>>44565387 #>>44565422 #>>44565447 #>>44565517 #>>44565637 #>>44565761 #>>44565844 #>>44566449 #>>44567425 #>>44568353 #>>44569351 #>>44569976 #>>44570595 #>>44571349 #>>44572134 #>>44575913 #>>44579934 #
    hn_throwaway_99 ◴[14 Jul 25 21:18 UTC] No.44565447[source]▶
    "Sooner or later the bubble's gonna burst" and "There's definitely something there" aren't mutually exclusive - in fact they often go together.

    It makes me perhaps a little sad to say that "I'm showing my age" by bringing up the .com boom/bust, but this feels exactly the same. The late 90s/early 00s were the dawn of the consumer Internet, and all of that tech vastly changed global society and brought you companies like Google and Amazon. It also brought you Pets.com, Webvan, and the bajillion other companies chronicled in "Fucked Company".

    You mention Anthropic, which I think is in a good a position as any to be one of the winners. I'm much less convinced about tons of the others. Look at Cursor - they were a first moving leader, but I know tons of people (myself included) who have cancelled their subscription because there are now better options.

    replies(9): >>44565540 #>>44565789 #>>44566666 #>>44567060 #>>44567139 #>>44570863 #>>44572666 #>>44581313 #>>44582976 #
    ttrmw ◴[14 Jul 25 21:58 UTC] No.44565789[source]▶
    what're you finding better than cursor now?
    replies(3): >>44565962 #>>44566263 #>>44566387 #
    1. g42gregory ◴[14 Jul 25 23:15 UTC] No.44566387[source]▶
    Claude Code with Pro, Max100, or Max200 subscriptions. Works with any IDE including none.

    For the time being, nothing comes close, at least for me.

    replies(4): >>44566592 #>>44569808 #>>44572658 #>>44580956 #
    2. 6Az4Mj4D ◴[14 Jul 25 23:56 UTC] No.44566592[source]▶
    Can you please share your Claude usage workflow?

    I use Github copilot and often tend to be frustrated. It messes up old things while making new. I use Claude 4 model in GH CP.

    replies(3): >>44567488 #>>44569394 #>>44572987 #
    3. fzzzy ◴[15 Jul 25 03:01 UTC] No.44567488[source]▶
    I use github copilot chat right now. First I use ask mode to ask it a question about the state of the codebase outlining my current understanding of the condition of the code. "I'm trying to x, I think the code currently does y." I include a few source files that I am talking about. I correct any misconceptions about the plan the llm may have and suggest stylistic changes to the code. Then once the plan seems correct, I switch to agent mode and ask it to implement the change on the codebase.

    Then I'll look through the changes and decide if it is correct. Sometimes can just run the code to decide if it is correct. Any compilation errors are pasted right back in to the chat in agent mode.

    Once the feature is done, commit the changes. Repeat for features.

    replies(2): >>44567641 #>>44570827 #
    4. 6Az4Mj4D ◴[15 Jul 25 03:39 UTC] No.44567641{3}[source]▶
    Does it remember context from chat mode and when you switch to agent mode?
    replies(2): >>44568543 #>>44568645 #
    5. addandsubtract ◴[15 Jul 25 06:46 UTC] No.44568543{4}[source]▶
    Yes. I think it used to be separate tabs, but now chat/agent mode is just a toggle. After discussing a concept, you can just switch to agent mode and tell it to "implement the discussed plan."
    6. Paradigma11 ◴[15 Jul 25 07:00 UTC] No.44568645{4}[source]▶
    Yes, it can't change between edit and ask/agent without losing context but ask <-> agent is no problem. You can also change to your custom chat modes https://code.visualstudio.com/docs/copilot/chat/chat-modes without losing context. At least that's what I just did in VSCode Insiders.

    Here are some nice copilot resources: https://github.com/github/awesome-copilot

    Also, I am using tons of markdown documents for planning, results, research.... This makes it easy to get new agent sessions or yourself up to context.

    7. csomar ◴[15 Jul 25 09:20 UTC] No.44569394[source]▶
    GitHub Copilot models are intentionally restricted, which unfortunately makes them less capable.

    I'm not the original poster, but regarding workflow, I've found it works better to let the LLM create one instead of imposing my own. My current approach is to have 10 instances generate 10 different plans, then I average them out.

    8. cft ◴[15 Jul 25 10:46 UTC] No.44569808[source]▶
    My problem with Claude code versus Cursor is that with Cursor I could "shop around" the same context with different foundational model providers, often finding bugs this way or or getting insights.

    Sometimes one model would get stuck in their thinking and submitting the same question to a different model would resolve the problem

    replies(1): >>44571324 #
    9. ghm2180 ◴[15 Jul 25 13:17 UTC] No.44570827{3}[source]▶
    I also do the same. I am on the 200$ maxpro plan. I often let the plan go to pretty fine level of detail, e.g. describe exactly what test conditions to check, what exact code conditions to follow. Do you write this to a separate plan file? I find myself doing this a lot since after compaction Claude starts to have code drift.

    Do you also get it to add to it's to-do list?

    I also find that having the o3 model review the plan helps catch gaps. Do you do the same?

    10. virgildotcodes ◴[15 Jul 25 14:07 UTC] No.44571324[source]▶
    I’m unaffiliated, but I’ve really been enjoying this - https://github.com/BeehiveInnovations/zen-mcp-server

    It allows you to have CC shoot out requests to o3, 2.5 pro and more. I was previously bouncing around between different windows to achieve the same thing. With this I can pretty much live in CC with just an editor open to inspect / manually edit files.

    11. hn_throwaway_99 ◴[15 Jul 25 16:10 UTC] No.44572658[source]▶
    This was my answer as well. And I think it just highlights all the serious dangers for the "API wrapper companies" compared to the foundation model companies.

    User experience is definitely worth something, and I think Cursor had the first great code integration, but then there is very little stopping the foundation model companies from coming in and deciding they want to cut out the middleman if so desired.

    12. mkozlows ◴[15 Jul 25 16:35 UTC] No.44572987[source]▶
    Github Copilot is weirdly bad, and all the alternatives are better. Sometimes people think "they have the same model, must be the same," but it's not.
    13. d_sc ◴[16 Jul 25 11:21 UTC] No.44580956[source]▶
    Amp Code is also very good, they released about 2 weeks ago their Oracle feature which leverages o3 to do reviews (https://ampcode.com/news/oracle). Amp leans the closer to Claude Code more than other solutions I’ve seen so far, the team there is really leaning into the agentic approach.

    I watch the changes on Kilo Code as well (https://github.com/Kilo-Org/kilocode). Their goal is to merge the best from Cline & Roo Code then sprinkle their own improvements on top.