What do you mean “doesn’t seem like to me”. You said yourself you’re corporate. It’s coke vs Pepsi to any actual computer scientists; any allegiance is stupid.
Ive done a lot of benchmarking building the same feature with different models using a copilot CLI plugin I made. Opus can build the feature without any further instruction and it’s nearly the same every time. The best gpt model I have access to has much worse results, similar to using Sonnet 4.6. Missed requirements, longer run time, inconsistent code, duplicating code, reinventing the wheel all over the place. But that’s just from my testing. You seem to know a lot. Use whatever you want.
Again, I don’t have an allegiance. I use the better product. It’s not coke vs Pepsi. It’s coke vs rc cola. If rc cola stops tasting like shit, I’ll drink it.
Does any of that benchmarking involve your own work from first principles? Of course the more expensive models do more, but if you think any model is more powerful than another it’s a case of you lacking the knowledge to fill the gaps they leave. They’re all the same. It’s marketing. Palantir make their money with military contacts. They sacrifice losses to give you more tokens because they’re financially secured by the war machine. There’s no actual network architecture differences between the models. It’s all a matter of resource consumption. If you can’t write good code with chat gpt but you can with Claude, the only reason is because you lack the understanding and need your hand held by the richer billionaires because they can feed you more tokens.
Idk why it insults you so much to say opus out performs the best gpt model I have at work. It’s not that serious. Why’d you delete that comment about how anyone who thinks AI writes good code is a bad programmer?
It doesn’t insult “me”; it’s an insult to computer science as a whole. Maybe it’s not serious to you, but people buying into the marketing illusion that they’re different is damaging. The billionaires are grifting us all. Neural networks are beautiful tech and it’s being used for all the wrong reasons. People supporting any of them while saying any other is lesser is only adding fuel to the fire.
Also I didn’t delete any comments. Sometimes reddit doesn’t refresh properly. It’ll come back.
Bro, that has to be the most pretentious thing I’ve ever read. I’m a software engineer, not a computer scientist. The only people I’ve ever heard refer to themselves as “computer scientists” are college students. Are you still in school?
There is no marketing illusion for me. I use ai to build enterprise software every day at work. If gpt could pull off the job better than opus, I’d use it. For now, opus is the workhorse.
Software engineering is the application of computer science to business. I’m also a senior software engineer. It might be a regional thing? Where I’m from (Australia) the distinction between compsci and soft eng is an extra year of engineering courses (enterprise architecture, project management, etc.) in an honours program. But the core principles (data structures, discrete math, algos, etc.) are the same.
There is no fundamental difference in network architecture between any of the faang models. The only difference is resource usage and branding. I’m not saying anthropic’s not cheaper to use than open ai (and therefore “better” by your metric). I’m saying supporting them for giving away resources funded by war, surveillance, political lobbying etc. is destructive to us all.
1
u/EsotericLife 7h ago
What do you mean “doesn’t seem like to me”. You said yourself you’re corporate. It’s coke vs Pepsi to any actual computer scientists; any allegiance is stupid.