He's intentionally forgoing all nuance in order to make this sound dramatic
> Somewhere around 20M people (0.2%) see first-hand that large, complex projects that used to take them weeks/months can now be completed by agents with a prompt.
No, they can't, at least not any semblance of quality. The cases we're seeing where this does kinda work is in ports and translation where all the rules are already documented in the best specification language possible with a way for the LLM to verify itself: code. We saw this close to a year ago now with Cloudflare and NextJS
> The impact scales with ambition, problem size, and horizon. A question with a paragraph answer barely stresses the system. You need a reservoir of big, difficult problems that you really care about
These are operating on different capabilities - AI's ability to answer informational queries as a chatbot frankly sucks and can't be trusted without verifying it. I run up against this every day. A problem with a verifiable answer on the other hand it's very good at solving. He knows this (his next paragraph) but he's putting them on the same scale of "stressing the system" to attempt to add proof to his introductory claim
And then there's the completely unverifiable scare that there are internal frontier models way beyond anything we've seen "swarms of thousands of agents collaborating over weeks on software mega projects: minting zero days, running cyber attacks and defenses at machine speeds, discovering new science, advancing the frontier of mathematics"
I dunno. I haven't been able to set up OpenAIs remote codex connection, their shit is buggy as hell and the web UI keeps crashing and making messages disappear. Is this what their internal superhuman "Things that would have taken top professionals in the industry years of work" looks like? Granted Claude has been really smooth, but still..
> where all the rules are already documented
Defined testability.
> swarms of thousands of agents collaborating over weeks on software mega projects
If you have defined testability, running a single agent, in a loop, over a goal will achieve the same results.
> minting zero days, running cyber attacks ... Granted Claude has been really smooth, but still
The old adage about monkeys writing Shakespeare applies here. Agents are just better monkeys and if the goal has a well defined outcome it's fairly easy to "Brute force" the way to an answer.
Congrats, you’ve discovered that you are not part of this group.
Yeah I suspect Karpathy is too generous. I’m finding a lot of devs with access to the best models are not effective with them.
So I think there is are growing gaps even within the described groups.
That group does not exist. It's all hype, zero substance.
This just goes to further show the divide.
You’re trying to tell me it’s all hype when I have (depending on the day) a top 50 Productivity app in the iOS App Store for which I’ve written and read exactly one line of code (the version number).
https://imgur.com/a/ua2lbxb
It is comical that you think a good bar for quality is the fucking appstore.
What even is this comment. Like, oh wow, an iOS app, AI hype=real.
???
Oh no, I get money deposited into my bank account every month for something I didn’t write and barely maintain. How will I ever gain value from AI?
Yes, this is impressive. When the iPhone SDK was first released in 2008, I spent months building apps to get them into the App Store. That included learning Objective C, XCode, various frameworks, and tons of manual testing. It was a lot of work!
People have been dumping garbage on the appstore and collecting checks for a long time. If this is all the AI revolution has to offer then it's not looking good.
Uhm, the set of apps that are successful and the set of apps that are crap are not exactly disjoint...
Good for you that you're gaining value, but that doesn't necessarily mean that you're providing value to others
If only there were some kind of rating or review system.
We sure don't see crappy apps with great ratings
Anyhow, if your users are currently satisfied, they might change their mind when they find that their personal data was uploaded to an open S3 bucket, when the new version wipes all their projects or when they find that not really everything was being saved (it's random examples, I don't know if they're applicable to your app).
Well done.
It's incredible to see AI denialists still active in late 2026.
I don't think AI is all hype at all. Opus 5.5 is really impressive. This twitter (x? whatever) post is infuriatingly hypey and just written for virality, though
It's insane how confidently you can make a claim like this in a forum where thousands (tens of thousands?) of people are using these tools daily to build useful software for themselves and others.
How can you possibly believe it's all hype? Is everyone just lying? Are we all paying $200 per month because... why?
Spend long enough (or not even that long) in corporate software development and you'd believe such unsubstantiated hype is possible. The only difference here is even stronger incentives to pretend the emperor has clothes: insane overinvestment, threats of job loss for non-believers, fear of missing out on massive alleged productivity gains.