For a definition of 100 which includes nobody actually using any LLM-written software in production at scale, other than Codex and Claude Code, which are both horrifically buggy, bloated, insecure pieces of software that are only used for their association with another piece of software gated behind them and which nobody would choose to use if they were themselves the third-party harnesses. If LLMs could get to 100, the promised software revolution I am told is here every day would actually be visible. We would be using LLM-generated compilers, an LLM-generated OS, an LLM-generated browser, LLM-generated databases, etc. etc. etc. etc, and not only are not using all of those things, we're not using a single one of those things.

What prevents AI from cloning photoshop feature for feature, bug for bug?

You have the perfect verifier.

The Halting Problem, for one.

> "PhotoCraft" is itself an admitted scam from its own prompter, who outright confessed here that he lied about its capabilities on Reddit to build hype

I know AI bros are allergic to reading, but at least feed my reply to a clanker and get it to summarise for you before ignoring what I wrote.

We might be early but we’re not wrong.

Pets.com was an ignominious scam but the internet flourished after a cleansing.

Do you think anyone will pay for photoshop in 10 years, when a free version can be conjured up just by screen capturing all the interactions professionals have with photoshop?

I have never once said LLMs are useless, Jesus Christ none of you can read. And yet you couldn't be more right. This is in fact exactly like the internet bubble. LLMs are a useful technology, just like the internet. And yet the people losing their goddamn minds in the hysteria are going to be bankrupted. I would almost be happy about it, if the ones most responsible weren't convincing a bunch of gullible saps to hold the bag while they make off with the profits.

You both should probably sit down for this. AI coding actually works.

And coding is one of those things that can be measured and is likely to have a lot more acceleration. Hopefully someone is also working at training the AI in more formal verification so insecure crap is less likely to ship.

Hey, this is largely a valuable comment, but you're breaking rules, don't attack your interlocutors like that. Be civil.

What makes you think people _aren't_ using LLMs to work on your OS, your compilers, your databases? I know for a fact Microsoft is using LLMs heavily in development. Linux now accepts LLM PRs. We just had an article a few days ago about how PostgreSQL is having dozens of bugs discovered and fixed via LLMs. I work in compilers and everyone I know uses LLMs.

I am talking about people starting new projects, which was the subject of this subthread. I am aware that Microsoft is using LLMs to work on Windows, and now they have remote code execution in MS Paint. Great.

> how PostgreSQL is having dozens of bugs discovered and fixed via LLMs

The PostgreSQL article was specifically about how the LLMs were incapable of fixing bugs, meaning they had to delay their next major version because humans were unable to deal with the volume of bugs. I did not make a claim that LLMs are useless, could not do code review, etc, but there is a difference between a useful tool and something that generates production-ready code.

This is what "100" looks like if you try to generate a DB from scratch: https://jepsen.io/analyses/particledb-1.1.4 - written in Rust, ""formally verified"", scammed AI-pilled investors out of $90 million for a database that fundamentally doesn't work in any capacity whatsoever.

>I am talking about people starting new projects, which was the subject of this subthread.

The subthread was also about 80-100. This seems like a goal post move.

>The PostgreSQL article was specifically about how the LLMs were incapable of fixing bugs

We must have read different articles. This one does not say that, as best as I can tell: https://www.theregister.com/databases/2026/10/16/postgres-19...

> We would be using LLM-generated compilers, an LLM-generated OS, an LLM-generated browser, LLM-generated databases, etc. etc. etc. etc, and not only are we not using all of those things, we're not using a single one of those things.

Speak for yourself :)

I’m can’t even believe that they think they can’t finish stuff. I am finishing absolutely everything I care to now. LLMs are the best thing ever to anyone who has unfinished stuff lying around. See the Goose programming language for an example, its design was written 15 years ago and perfected over time but the effort to write the compiler was just too much… before LLM. Claude wrote it in a couple of weeks I think. And I tried it, it’s as good as it looks.