https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46456850
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44726957
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44110805
(You've also been breaking the site guidelines in plenty of other places - e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46521516, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46395646. This is not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.)
My experience scrolling X and HN is a bunch of people going "omg opus omg Claude Code I'm 10x more productive" and that's it. Just hand wavy anecdotes based on their own perceived productivity. I'm open to being convinced but just saying stuff is not convincing. It's the opposite, it feels like people have been put under a spell.
I'm following The Primeagen, he's doing a series where he is trying these tools on stream and following peoples advice on how to use them the best. He's actually quite a good programmer so I'm eager to see how it goes. So far he isn't impressed and thus neither am I. If he cracks it and unlocks significant productivity then I will be convinced.
Simon has produced plenty of evidence over the past year. You can check their submission history and their blog: https://simonwillison.net/
The problem with people asking for evidence is that there's no level of evidence that will convince them. They will say things like "that's great but this is not a novel problem so obviously the AI did well" or "the AI worked only because this is a greenfield project, it fails miserably in large codebases".
