undefined | Better HN

0 pointssheepscreek2mo ago0 comments

If it’s any consolation, it was able to one-shot a UI & data sync race condition that even Opus 4.6 struggled to fix (across 3 attempts).

So far I like how it’s less verbose than its predecessor. Seems to get to the point quicker too.

While it gives me hope, I am going to play it by the ear. Otherwise it’s going to be - Gemini for world knowledge/general intelligence/R&D and Opus/Sonnet 4.6 to finish it off.

UPDATE: I may have spoken too soon.

  > Fixing Truncated Array Syncing Bug
  > I traced the missing array items to a typo I made earlier! 
  > When fixing the GC cast crash, I accidentally deleted the assignment..
  > ..effectively truncating the entire array behind it.

These errors should not be happening! They are not the result of missing knowledge or a bad hunch. They are coming from an incorrect find/replace, which makes them completely avoidable!

On a lighter note, every time it happens, I think about this Family Guy: https://youtu.be/HtT2xdANBAY?si=QicynJdQR56S54VL&t=184

0 comments

sigmoid102mo ago

For me it's Opus 4.6 for researching code/digging through repos, gpt 5.3 codex for writing code, gemini for single hardcore science/math algorithms and grok for things the others refuse to answer or skirt around (e.g. some security/exploitability related queries). Get yourself one of those wrappers that support all models and forget thinking about who has the best model. The question is who has the best model for your problem. And there's usually a correct answer, even if it changes regularly.

bdelmas2mo ago

Yes I came to the same conclusion. Just to add: be careful with Opus 4.6 guys. It’s expensive…

scrollop2mo ago

Using simtheory.ai which is very good, you can switch models within a conversation and use mcps

replwoacause2mo ago

Are you associated with this somehow?

qnleigh2mo ago

Interesting, I've had similar issues. It seems to be very clumsy when using its internal tooling. I've seen diffs where it accidentally garbled significant amounts of code, which it then had to go in and manually fix. It's also introduced bugs into features that it wasn't supposed to be touching, and when I asked it why it was making changes to I the other code, it answered that it had failed to copy-paste since large blocks of code correctly.

sheepscreekOP2mo ago

Yeah, I whole heartedly agree with this. Even Codex does this sometimes, although it has been consistently much better than the others at following instructions.

The problem is again that you can’t ever fully trust an agent did exactly what you asked for and in the exact manner that you had hoped.

It works just like you’re dealing with a human companion. Trust takes time to build. Over the period you realize the other individuals weaknesses and support them there.

What makes it a bit challenging right now is the pace of innovation. By the time we get used to a model’s personality, a new update comes out that alters it in unknown ways. Now you’re back to square one.

I’ve been experimenting with asking one frontier model to check on another’s work. That’s proven to be better than doing nothing. Usually they’ll have some genuinely useful feedback.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse