OpenAI still leads in agentic terminal coding, but by less.
Claude can plan the work and then run hundreds of parallel subagents in a single session (and with Opus 4.8, the agents can run for even longer)
That’s one way to turn profitable before the IPO, I guess. Goodbye tokens.
To begin with, I wouldn’t say I’m an enthusiast, but I do find the breakthroughs in LLM tech the recent years to be interesting. I sometimes wonder how we got so blasé that a computer acing the Turing test is passed off as “spicy autocomplete, ho hum”.
I also think you’ll find that many people on Lemmy do hate AI to a worrying degree. Just look at the reception this and other posts about it get here, in a technology community, where you’d expect news about one of the most sci-fi-like (to me, at least) technologies to be welcome.
To the rest of your comment, I must say I find it strange to come to this community and complain that you find news about LLMs (a technology) useful for coding (also a technology), arguing that it’s not interesting to you. To each their own, I suppose.
Yeah it’s interesting as long as you can completely disregard all of the negative impacts but if you disregard all of the negative impacts and I would argue you’re not assessing the technology in a fair manner.
The Turing test was also designed back in the day when a computer was just a big box in a room. An AI passing the Turing test is just something to throw at the media, it’s not a meaningful experiment. The Apple 2 was able to pass the Turing test.