Hacker News Reader

Comment by bratao | Hacker News Reader

I was excited about their AI Assistant, thinking in something local, but it is an wrapper for OpenAI and will go to their servers. Super frustrating

View on HN

> can connect you to OpenAI for now and will include other language model providers in the future

This language clearly indicates possibilities for local models in the future or at the very least other options for hosted models.

A good alternative is the codegpt plugin. You simply configure it with your openai api key and it should work. You have to set up a credit card so they can bill you for token usage. But that's super cheap. My bills are below 1$ every month.

Code gpt allows you to select code and then trigger different prompts for that. Like review this code, find bugs, optimize this code, etc. If you select gpt 4, it gets pretty OK. I've caught a few edge cases with it.

Indeed.

I'm also very interested to hear what their billing will be for this, which they conveniently don't mention.

...because, bluntly, that openAI sh$t isn't free (specifically custom models), and either a) jetbrains is taking a hit to their bottom line using it, or b) they're going to roll out new pricing off the back of it.

I have no experience with other AI assistants, but Cody for IntelliJ is free and it's not bad. It also uses cloud AI though, Anthropic Claude I think.

It is crazy that for a feature of a paid ide I need to pay for another 3rd party service.

How is it crazy? Jetbrains' IDEs provide more than enough value as it is. I don't want to pay for features like their collaborative coding or AI assistant that I won't use.

Would you rather them roll out cost-plus pricing or roll up the cost of new features into higher base prices?

Should they just not implement the feature at all, or would you like them to pay for it?

I don't understand what the exact problem is you're having.

I should get all features once I pay for the IDE. Either they shouldn't add the feature or pay for it themselves.

But it's literally a feature that creates ongoing cost based on usage. Why must you either get it for free, or not have it in the IDE at all? Why can't they implement it for people who want to use it, and you continue not using it (since it's impossible for them to finance with the existing licensing model)?

I could understand your point of view if it was a feature that could be made free in some way. But it literally can't - so you just don't want others do have this feature, because you can't have it for free. Why?

I think it should come as a promoted extension or something, there are just many users who can't or won't use this feature due to it requiring a contract with a third party. Shipping it with the IDE itself unneccessarily bloats it and probably slows things down.

If you can show a negative impact from this feature when disabled I'll agree with you. Until then I'll assume it doesn't have a negative impact (like other IntelliJ features I don't use).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com