Just because a high skilled programmer can use an LLM with some effectiveness doesnt mean someone with less skills will be able to match their ability. You LLM-kiddies are worse than nft people in 2021 claiming they're making art.
I really cant wait until the inference providers 5x their prices and you guys realize you're completely incompetent and that you've tied your competency 1:1 to the quality and quantity of tokens you can afford. You're going to be a character from the movie idiocracy.
Of course you'll still be coping by claiming you're so productive using some budget kimi 2.5 endpoint that consumes all your personal data and trains on your inputs.
>with some effectiveness doesnt mean someone with less skills will be able to match their ability
I never said they would.
>Of course you'll still be coping by claiming you're so productive using some budget kimi 2.5 endpoint
I would. I already run my persistent agent on Kimi 2.5 and use Kimi CLI.
My motivation for learning how to use agents has nothing to do with my ability. In fact I didn't think LLMs provided value for a very long time - the work I do tends to be embedded in nature ad LLMs were really bad at generating useful code.
Opus 4.5 changed that and like every programming tool I've used in the past, I decided to sit seriously with it and try and learn how to use it. If coding agents turn out to be a bust, then oh well, it goes into the graveyard of shit I've learned that has gone nowhere (Angular, Coffeescript, various NoSQL databases, various "big data" frameworks). Even now one of my favorite languages is Rust, but I really took the plunge into the language before async/await and people also called it overhyped.
If coding agents are real, I don't want to be struggling to learn how to use them while everyone else is being 10x more productive. There's no downside to learning how to use them for me. I've invested my time in many hyped software frameworks, some good and some bad.