9 ms·
Fabric is an open-source framework for augmenting humans using AI
- microbass 2y agoI'm looking forward to the Go rewrite. Purely so it's less of a pain to declaratively install, and I can work it into my workflow.
- martsa1 2y agoI wonder why they haven't setup a pyinstaller build for consumers that just want to use it? Making people have python and faff with virtual environments feels an odd choice... Would be nice to see a nix flake etc for tinkerers as well...
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- rcarmo 2y agoThe nice thing about this is that it’s all CLI-based. Zero chat, zero web UIs, all UNIX-like composable patterns.
- secfirstmd 2y agoUnfortunately though this means the amount of people who can use it is dramatically reduced.
- danielrm26 2y agoCheck the help. It has a GUI.
- nicocesar 2y agoI'm a CLI dinosaur here. But is there a need of a 42.4MB animated logo gif for the GUI? https://github.com/danielmiessler/fabric/tree/main/images/fabric-logo-gif.gif https://github.com/danielmiessler/fabric/tree/main/images/fa...
- bugglebeetle 2y agoI read the entirety of the README for this and have no idea how this is useful aside from as a prompt DB. Like almost every AI library, it looks like a bunch of gestures in the direction of various hype things that don’t work (e.g. agents).
- danielrm26 2y agoIts unusefulness is probably why it has nearly 20K stars and keeps hitting the GitHub trending page.
- QuiDortDine 2y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
- d0mine 2y agoThere is Fabric Python library to execute shell commands remotely over SSH https://pypi.org/project/fabric/ https://pypi.org/project/fabric/
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- teruakohatu 2y agoI vouched for this post. Not sure why it or previous submissions were dead. Seems interesting.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- blooalien 2y agod0mine [0] already mentioned this [1] (and was apparently downvoted to oblivion for saying it), but there's already another Python project named Fabric that's been around quite a while now. [2,3] Downvote me too if you like, but it's not gonna change the fact that there's already a project using that name. - [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=d0mine https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=d0mine - [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40893147 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40893147 - [2]: https://pypi.org/project/fabric/ https://pypi.org/project/fabric/ - [3]: https://www.fabfile.org/ https://www.fabfile.org/
- zaptrem 2y agoFabric is not a rare name https://lightning.ai/docs/fabric/stable/ https://lightning.ai/docs/fabric/stable/ https://github.com/FabricMC https://github.com/FabricMC https://github.com/hyperledger/fabric https://github.com/hyperledger/fabric
- nyokodo 2y ago> We believe the purpose of technology is to help humans flourish, so when we talk about AI we start with the human problems we want to solve. This is something missing from the discussion around AI. There is fatalism or skepticism about AI capabilities vs human usefulness but very little positive philosophy about using AI to augment human capabilities rather than replace them. Even if automating everything were possible it doesn’t mean we need to and I’d argue that we should not want to.
- mitthrowaway2 2y agoYou don't want to automate your job, I don't want to automate my job, but the shareholders want to automate both of our jobs. If it can happen, it will.
- shadowgovt 2y agoFor what it's worth, I definitely want to automate my job. If I'm not writing code that is supposed to put me yesterday out of a job, it doesn't matter whether I'm wasting my employer's money; I'm wasting my one finite shot at this planet.
- oli-g 2y agoAnd once you reclaim your one finite shot at this planet, who's gonna pay for your dinner?
- shadowgovt 2y agoEither me, by getting paid to automate someone else's problems, or food stamps.
- TaylorAlexander 2y agoWhat I want is to automate the manufacturing systems I depend upon while also structuring things in such a way that I am part of a cooperative that owns and operates that equipment. Then me and everyone else in this co-op can receive the benefits of automation instead of being kicked to the curb so capital owners can get another super yacht. Point being, automation isn’t the root of the problem, the structure of firms in our economy is.
- zersiax 2y agoHonestly this looks cool but setting it up is a bit much. Like... I think the idea of this is cool, but by the time I've done all this setup I've more than likely forgotten what it is I was trying to do to begin with, and even when most of it's already installed I need to make sure several things are running etc. before this becomes essentially a link in the chain. That feels to me like it's going against the ease of integration the project is meant to facilitate a tiny bit. Like somebody else already stated in this thread, having a bit more of a ready-to-go solution, stick it in docker if you must, would probably help here.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- danielrm26 2y agoWe’re moving to go.
- ryanmerket 2y agoWhen influencers code.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- danielrm26 2y agoPwned.
- QuiDortDine 2y agoLooking at the facts and references sections is an exercise in absurdity: by and large, they contain neither objective facts nor credible references. Until the thing can automatically fact-check it is useless, once it does I suspect it will become useless, as knowing what information to trust is most of the problem when trying to gain wisdom from something.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- bluelightning2k 2y agoI'm an "AI engineer" as I've seen others loftily describe it: meaning a traditional full stack who works on an AI first code base. I am a heavy user of the OpenAI and Gemini APIs... But I just don't understand what purpose these "AI frameworks" solve. It's almost to the point where I feel stupid for just not getting it. You write words. Merge your context in. What possible need is there for any library?
- bbor 2y agoBasically the answer comes down to the technical term “ensembles of agents”. All these frameworks dance around it in different ways, but ultimately everyone’s trying to recreate this basic AI structure because it’s known to work well. I mean, they even implemented it on a sub-human level with GPT’s mixture of experts! If you haven’t had the chance yet, I highly recommend skimming Russel and Norvig’s textbook on symbolic AI. Really good stuff that is only made more useful by the advent of intuitive algorithms
- fny 2y agoThis is just a pile of prompts rolled up into a GitHub repo and marketed as something revolutionary. Don’t feel stupid. There’s nothing to get.
- gixco 2y agoI saw a relatively new AI company already valued at over $1 bn publish a "new technique" recently, complete with whitepaper and all. I looked at the implementation and... it was just querying four different models, concatenating the results and asking a fifth model to merge the responses together. Makes me wish I had spent some time in college learning how to sell rather than going so hard on the engineering side.
- ianbutler 2y agoThe novel part of that paper was not merging the responses. The last model can, from the inputs, synthesize higher quality overall responses than any of the individual models. It’s a bit surprising that works and your take on it is overly reductive largely because you’re wrong in your understanding of what it was doing.
- drowntoge 2y ago[flagged]
- worstspotgain 2y agoSmall AI boats sail a rough sea in search of the new world. They can sink, never find land, or get sherlocked by massive frigates if they do. Everyone knows it would be better to fly, i.e. go up one layer and build generic public infra instead. But then they just float off into the obligatory-xkcd-verse: https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/
- aswegs8 2y agoThis incredibly insightful piece about AI infra and why it is a bad idea to build in the space was on here lately: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40862436 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40862436
- walterbell 2y agoAlan Kay on "AI", human augmentation and Doug Engelbart, June 2024, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40868478 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40868478 One big distinction in the 1962 time period is that they thought of “machine intelligence” as being a kind of complimentary set of thinking tools that could be “symbiotic” to how humans were able to think. They were not at all thinking about something like a slave or a major domo, but something more like a research assistant or a “Memex” (the latter was a big influence on Doug’s thinking). In the very late 60s the “official AI researchers” started to think that something like “intelligent Greek slaves” were needed for the “Romans” (Americans), and became rivals to Doug’s notion of elevating human thinking rather than just elevating power. This was a bad idea then … and it’s a bad idea today.
- leobg 2y agoI find it interesting that Engelbart, Kay, Jobs and even Elon have all been learned people who saw in AI a way of augmenting human capabilities, finding truth, giving kids new ways of learning about history and science, and tackling planet scale challenges. Someone posted an old video here a few days ago of Steve Jobs giving a speech in the 1980s saying that his dream was to make the computer into a medium that allows you to have a dialogue with Aristotle. Yet I’ve never heard anything like that from the guy who is center stage for AI today, Sam Altman. Maybe Sam is a a visionary in his own right. Maybe be recognized that people just care a lot more about SEO, about not having to talk to customers anymore, and about the kids just being quiet.
- hollerith 2y agoHuh? Engelbart didn't like AI or at least didn't want his team to have anything to do with it: >I recall seeing an interview with Engelbart that went over his split with the IPTO. He said that Lick came to him, and was taken with the hype with what was called “AI” at the time, that he was concerned that Engelbart’s research team at ARC had not put a focus on that yet, and that Engelbart seemed to have no intention of pursuing AI as a goal in the near future. Engelbart seemed frustrated/exasperated with Lick’s insistence on putting more attention on this. The discussion ended with Lick saying the IPTO could no longer fund him. . . . The take-away for me was Engelbart said this was “a sad parting,” because he was grateful, and had respect for Lick, but thought that he was wrong to press his team to pursue AI at that point. https://www.quora.com/What-would-be-the-place-of-AI-in-Doug-Engelbarts-vision-of-Augmenting-Human-Intellect-How-can-we-reconsider-things-within-current-AI-developments/answer/Alan-Kay-11 https://www.quora.com/What-would-be-the-place-of-AI-in-Doug-...
- efilife 2y agoCool. Let's take a well-known word prompt and rebrand it to pattern for no reason whatsoever, other than confusion. I know programmers love fancy labels but this is just forced
- dhalucario 2y agoCan we not use the name of my favorite minecraft modloader for some AI project? Thanks.