Comment by aspenmartin

Right no I understand what you mean, I asked to be sure and you’ve confirmed my understanding.

I think we’re talking past each other because your comment is like 99% interesting and insightful and also I agree with it completely but there is only one part of your claim that I have an issue with which is

> It won't imagine a new Git feature because it has no idea what it could possibly be because its authors don't know that either.

I left comments in other threads with a lot of detail but this is a fairly common misconception. It is true in a sort of practical sense today, and I have many experiences as you do with respect to this, but the gist is: this is a world of RL with verifiable rewards, you are not bounded by human ability at all and that is why we have the adoption, funding, and frothy excitement. It is not simply mimicking human coding. In early stages it will because human programming traces are used as kind of a bootstrap to get to an RL phase without any limitation on performance. This is a very well studied field and it just isn’t that much of a question of if and now it’s not even really a question of when.

> What did it invent?

This is a perpetual question with constantly moving goal posts so I’ve given up convincing anyone but by now it’s solving unsolved Erdos problems, not sure how convincing you find that (not opus though but that hardly matters now)

The point I’m trying to make is: we aren’t there yet but it’s a crazy idea to think that isn’t imminent given all of the measurement and observations we have.

Additionally my point on 4.5 being a turning point is adoption. You wouldn’t see adoption numbers if we were not accelerating rapidly from say 3.x performance along the scaling trend that we’ve known for years now