Most active commenters
  • oblio(4)

←back to thread

Coding with LLMs in the summer of 2025 – an update

(antirez.com)
600 points antirez | 18 comments | 20 Jul 25 11:04 UTC | HN request time: 0.213s | source | bottom
Show context
dakiol ◴[20 Jul 25 14:22 UTC] No.44625484[source]▶
> Gemini 2.5 PRO | Claude Opus 4

Whether it's vibe coding, agentic coding, or copy pasting from the web interface to your editor, it's still sad to see the normalization of private (i.e., paid) LLM models. I like the progress that LLMs introduce and I see them as a powerful tool, but I cannot understand how programmers (whether complete nobodies or popular figures) dont mind adding a strong dependency on a third party in order to keep programming. Programming used to be (and still is, to a large extent) an activity that can be done with open and free tools. I am afraid that in a few years, that will no longer be possible (as in most programmers will be so tied to a paid LLM, that not using them would be like not using an IDE or vim nowadays), since everyone is using private LLMs. The excuse "but you earn six figures, what' $200/month to you?" doesn't really capture the issue here.

replies(46): >>44625521 #>>44625545 #>>44625564 #>>44625827 #>>44625858 #>>44625864 #>>44625902 #>>44625949 #>>44626014 #>>44626067 #>>44626198 #>>44626312 #>>44626378 #>>44626479 #>>44626511 #>>44626543 #>>44626556 #>>44626981 #>>44627197 #>>44627415 #>>44627574 #>>44627684 #>>44627879 #>>44628044 #>>44628982 #>>44629019 #>>44629132 #>>44629916 #>>44630173 #>>44630178 #>>44630270 #>>44630351 #>>44630576 #>>44630808 #>>44630939 #>>44631290 #>>44632110 #>>44632489 #>>44632790 #>>44632809 #>>44633267 #>>44633559 #>>44633756 #>>44634841 #>>44635028 #>>44636374 #
1. webappguy ◴[20 Jul 25 16:02 UTC] No.44626479[source]▶
I personally can’t wait for programming to ‘die’. It has stolen a decade of my life minimum. Like veterinarians being trained to help pets ultimately finding out a huge portion of the job is killing them. I was not sufficiently informed that I’d spend a decade arguing languages, dealing with thousands of other developers with diverging opinions, legacy code, poorly if at all maintained libraries, tools, frameworks, etc if you have been in the game at least a decade please don’t @. Adios to programming as it was (happily welcoming a new DIFFERENT reality whatever that means). Nostalgia is for life, not staring at a screen 8hrs a day
replies(6): >>44626645 #>>44626674 #>>44626910 #>>44626980 #>>44627405 #>>44629305 #
2. bluefirebrand ◴[20 Jul 25 16:19 UTC] No.44626645[source]▶
Feel free to change careers and get lost, no one is forcing you to be a programmer.

If you feel it is stealing your life, then please feel free to reclaim your life at any time.

Leave the programming to those of us who actually want to do it. We don't want you to be a part of it either

replies(1): >>44628200 #
3. lbrito ◴[20 Jul 25 16:22 UTC] No.44626674[source]▶
Maybe it's just not for you.

I've been programming professionally since 2012 and still love it. To me the sweet spot must've been the early mid 2000s, with good enough search engines and ample documentation online.

4. llbbdd ◴[20 Jul 25 16:47 UTC] No.44626910[source]▶
You got some arguably rude replies to this but you're right. I've been doing this a long time and the stuff you listed is never the fun part despite some insistence on HN that it somehow is. I love programming as a platonic ideal but those moments are fleeting between the crap you described and I can't wait for it to go.
replies(1): >>44627071 #
5. hsuduebc2 ◴[20 Jul 25 16:54 UTC] No.44626980[source]▶
Did you expect computer programming not to involve this much time at a computer screen? Most modern jobs especially in tech do. If it’s no longer fulfilling, it might be worth exploring a different role or field instead of waiting for the entire profession to change.

I understand your frustration but the problem is mostly people. Not the particular skill itself.

6. ◴[20 Jul 25 17:02 UTC] No.44627071[source]▶
7. vunderba ◴[20 Jul 25 17:39 UTC] No.44627405[source]▶
> It has stolen a decade of my life minimum.

Feels like this is a byproduct of a poor work-life balance more than an intrinsic issue with programming itself. I also can't really relate since I've always enjoyed discussing challenging problems with colleagues.

I'm assuming by "die" you mean some future where autonomous agentic models handle all the work. In this world, where you can delete your entire programming staff and have a single PM who tells the models what features to implement next, where do you imagine you fit in?

I just hope for your sake that you have a fallback set of viable skills to survive in this theoretical future.

8. oblio ◴[20 Jul 25 18:57 UTC] No.44628200[source]▶
Don't be rude.
replies(1): >>44628816 #
9. __loam ◴[20 Jul 25 20:04 UTC] No.44628816{3}[source]▶
He's being honest, not rude
replies(1): >>44629086 #
10. oblio ◴[20 Jul 25 20:37 UTC] No.44629086{4}[source]▶
Honesty doesn't look like this:

> [...] get lost [...]

> [..] We don't want you to be a part of it either. [...]

He's being rude.

Honesty would be, something like:

> I (and probably many others) like programming a lot. Even if you're frustrated with it, I think a great deal of people will be sad if somehow programming disappeared completely. It might be best for you if you just found a job that you love more, instead.

Also the original comment makes a point that's SUPER valid and anyone working as a professional programmer for 10+ years can't really deny:

> poorly if at all maintained libraries, tools, frameworks

Most commercial code just sucks due to misaligned incentives. Open Source is better, but not always, as a lot of Open Source code is just commercial code opened up after the fact.

replies(3): >>44629213 #>>44629884 #>>44632606 #
11. ◴[20 Jul 25 20:52 UTC] No.44629213{5}[source]▶
12. midasz ◴[20 Jul 25 21:05 UTC] No.44629305[source]▶
Damn dude. I'm just having fun most of the time. The field is so insanely broad that if you've got an ounce of affinity there's a corner that would fit you snugly AND you'd make a decent living. Take a look around.
13. theshackleford ◴[20 Jul 25 22:17 UTC] No.44629884{5}[source]▶
> Honesty doesn't look like this

Sure it does. Reads incredibly honestly to me.

replies(1): >>44630763 #
14. punkspider ◴[21 Jul 25 00:41 UTC] No.44630763{6}[source]▶
Seems both honest and rude, when it could've been honest and understanding.

Responding to the original comment with 'get lost' and 'we don't want you either' is not constructive in my opinion.

replies(1): >>44630868 #
15. bluefirebrand ◴[21 Jul 25 01:04 UTC] No.44630868{7}[source]▶
I'm not sure why anyone expects this conversation to be constructive at this point

People who are cheering for LLM coding because they hate actually coding themselves are cheering for programmers to lose their livelihoods

I am not going to be polite and constructive to people who don't care if my livelihood is destroyed by their new tools. Why should I? They are cheering for my ruin

replies(1): >>44632427 #
16. oblio ◴[21 Jul 25 06:53 UTC] No.44632427{8}[source]▶
Or, you know, you could just... say nothing? Downvote and move on.

It's not like OP is Sam Altman and one of the actual AI bros. This thing will happen or not happen regardless of what OP wants.

Amusingly, you've committed the same basic mistake as LLMs, which just don't know when to shut up :-p

17. Der_Einzige ◴[21 Jul 25 07:26 UTC] No.44632606{5}[source]▶
Rudeness is a good rhetorical choice to make a point. Only stupid idiots would think differently.
replies(1): >>44640360 #
18. oblio ◴[21 Jul 25 21:00 UTC] No.44640360{6}[source]▶
Almost any form of speech/writing is a rhetorical choice.

Rudeness being considered a <<good>> rhetorical choice reflects poorly on its source's rhetorical prowess.