Do you think companies do not hide secrets? I think you are wrong but maybe I do not understand your point of view. However let's see my example.
Imagine: you are a boss of a company and own a powerful tool which can give you a lot of advantages. In short: it allows you to earn more money than competing companies. Would you share this tool to everybody, so that means competing companies could destroy your business or you keep the tool in secret and slowly build empire?
I do not know if OpenAI has powerful LLMs/AI things but I can be sure they do not share everything what they have. I think the only way they could share hidden "powerful tool" is situation where men in black visit CEO and talk with him/her about co-op. Of course CEO is "happy" because he/she can not refuse if you know what I mean. But still hidden powerful tool is hidden but this time another "more important guys" have access to it.
Yes, it would be good. However I guess even simple show/hide chapters/sections also would do good work. It could be something similar to foldable directories or code fragments in code editors (for example VS Code has this feature).
It sounds great and I hope local LLM/AI will be more powerful and available even on old hardware.
I tried llama.cpp with offloading "all what could be" to my GPU (GTX 750 Ti 2 GB). I could run local Qwen2.5-Coder quite fast (I do not remember but something like 25-30 t/s). However this model generates bad code (I tried Python and JavaScript). So, for my setup it is better to chat with free ChatGPT and do copying-pasting between web chat and code editor.
Is it even worth for trying something on my GPU? What do you think?
And yes, I use Claude Code (Opus 5.5) and Codex in my job but for personal stuff I would prefer trying free solutions (it is the reason I tried local LLM). I do not want to buy subs, at leats for now.
Models and inference engines are getting better and more optimized everyday so it is definitely worth experimenting with your GPU. You should probably check on newer finetuned and or REAP models Huggingface that could fit on your system.
I believe in your case the model quality matters a lot. To my (trust me bro) experience any MOE model, finetuned or not, with params < 19B even with Q4-quant always give lackluster results. So any Qwen2.5 wouldn't suffice to even simple coding tasks. For your case maybe you can bump it up to a Gemma4 E2B/E4B or Qwen3.5-9B. Also make sure that your current build of llamacpp actually uses your GPU with CUDA.
Yes, I was using CUDA toolkit on my Debian. Anyway, thanks for reply. I think I could try something but definitely it looks like it will not have better quality, even for writing simple code function by function :P
But you can still solve problems and write code by hand on your own for your hobby projects. You do not need to solve problems only in paid job. However I think with LLMs/AI you can go further and do more difficult problems. Of course somebody can create whole app faster and from scratch etc. but it does not mean that person will understand everything. But what does this person really need to know? Implementation details such as every piece of code (ihmo not possible), selected framework details, business logic code, high overview of architecture? But why do we treat programming language backend and "under the hood code" as not necessary artifacts? "Because it is complex and possible for single human". Yes and with LLMs generated code we go further. Whole apps will be artifacts, pieces of bigger and more complex systems. I guess it will be like this but I am not sure, we will see.
I think for some people universities are just the way for forcing them to study - without it many people would not study on your own. There are different reasons why they would not do it: laziness, no study plans, no ability to study "alone" and so on. Imagine a world where there is not any forced education even for children. Do you think that people would care less or more about learning? Of course there would people who could improve themselves, focus more on their goals and so on. But also there would be a lot people who just do not want to learn anything. Just give them shelter, food, let them have fun, sex, partying and some work from time to time so they could get money. World would be so different place but... who knows maybe it could work after really long period of time full of experiments, trials and errors.
I think it is the same category such as mathematicians, doctors, biologists, scientists, sales representatives, marketers, teachers, artists, influencers (yeah, these human influencers) and so on. Of course you can get rid off programmers or mathematicians but then you need to understand and handle stuff on your own. You still need somebody who can check "what's going on". Imagine you are boss. Do you really want to do all things on your own with agents? Sure, let's do it. I think some people can do it but there is a lot of people who prefer somebody else does it for them. You are boss, you know.
I know and understand it. However I see a lot of people being sad and angry because of LLMs/AI agents. I would like to add to this website section about LLMs/AI. You can use them or not at all if you want. I guess nobody forces you to use "magic" AI in your hobby projects.
You could practice the magic in your 9-5 too before.
If you do so now, your coworker has built two features and automated some other job in the time you found the best design pattern for a particular problem.
It's actually worse than that. In a repo where there is a heavy amount of AI code, it becomes impossible to manually write code. The AI code favors obtuse, unmaintainable mess (from the standpoint of a non-AI dev). Constantly overwriting your changes, large comments, hacky logic, overly-defensive programming, misunderstandings that the LLM made that cause you to waste hours debugging.
I've come to the realization that AI code bases are effectively AI-only code bases, unless one is using AI as just a code-autocomplete, then that seems mostly fine. But most devs are using it as an end2end implementation tool, having it 1-shot full features, and then iterating on them with the agent afterwards. The amount of churn and terrible code stops the manual coder from doing anything effectively.
In my own team's codebase, I'm confident that we would actually be further along without AI, and that AI coding is a hindrance (although AI debugging seems to be a pretty good tool). It is made worse that everyone does code reviews with AI now, and it constantly gets things wrong, and when its right, it's usually for the most basic, unimportant issues (again with the overly defensive coding style). This waste the manual coder time trying to figure out if the issue its requesting a fix for is an actual problem or not.
No shortage of universal statements here. We all know it. This is the way it is. But now the goalpost moves to that I will starve in two months time instead?
Of course failing reality itself, one can just move on to psychobabbling[1] about the inner state of people who are disagreeable towards their inevitability.
Yeah. During job use AI if you have to (or just change job if you can). In your free time do programming by hand if you really need. I can understand it but some people can not handle it. I read on Hacker News, Reddit and some other places that people are sad and angry about LLMs/AI. They usually say some shit such as no more problem solving or AI do all work for them.
When you have made a life and career out of a particular skillset, like writing code, the fact that a machine is now doing your job is a hard swallow pill.
You will keep the denial and finding all the cons for as long as you can.
"Oh, but it's not clean", "Oh, but it's a spaghetti mess".
Because accepting that the previous points don't matter anymore in the overwhelming majority of cases, and the technology keeps getting better at each release is difficult.
It is sad after all. I enjoyed the magic and craft too. Now I'm a borderline meat relay, who'se added value is only because business and product people are too lazy to instruct the tools.
> If you do so now, your coworker has built two features and automated some other job in the time you found the best design pattern for a particular problem.
And his stuff is also broken, whereas mine is not. So in the end he isn't actually faster than me.
I use Claude Opus 5.5 and Codex Sol 6.1 in my job and I love it. I wish be able to run local models which have power at least current Opus 5.5 on medium hardware which does not cost millions $. This is my dream, running LLMs and AI agents to just create things for myself. On my really old hardware I can only run simple and small 1.5B model (Qwen2.5-Coder-1.5B) and well... Ihmo it works fine with offloading to GPU and using llama.cpp but it does a lot of mistakes so I deciced to stop using it.
Is it the same Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 decompilation project? If yes, then why author says he/she does no release source code? If I remember correctly, it has to be open sourced Modern Warfare 2 modernized engine and so on? Or do I miss something?
But you still can do it without LLMs/AI. And even better you can be proud that you did something "by hand" without AI help. Do you know that you can still cooking, singing, programming and so on? You do not need to buy ready meals, generate music by prompts or let model to figure out solution.
Imagine: you are a boss of a company and own a powerful tool which can give you a lot of advantages. In short: it allows you to earn more money than competing companies. Would you share this tool to everybody, so that means competing companies could destroy your business or you keep the tool in secret and slowly build empire?
I do not know if OpenAI has powerful LLMs/AI things but I can be sure they do not share everything what they have. I think the only way they could share hidden "powerful tool" is situation where men in black visit CEO and talk with him/her about co-op. Of course CEO is "happy" because he/she can not refuse if you know what I mean. But still hidden powerful tool is hidden but this time another "more important guys" have access to it.