8note

26 ms·

781.
by 8note 7mo ago
double escape gets you to a rewind. not sure about much else. the conversation history is a linked list, so you can screw with it, with some care. I spend this afternoon building an MCP do break the conversation up into topics, then suggest
782.
by 8note 7mo ago
Cline gives you such a thing. you dont really know where the dumb zone by numbers though, only by feel.
783.
by 8note 7mo ago
oh, ive found that something about compaction has been dropping everything that might be useful. exact opposite experience
784.
by 8note 7mo ago
i find gemini gets real real bad when you get far into the context - gets into loops, forgets how to call tools, etc
785.
by 8note 7mo ago
im guessing this is why the compacts have started sucking? i just finished getting me some nicer tools for manipulating the graph so i could compact less frequently, and fish out context from the prior session. maybe itll still be useful, t
786.
by 8note 7mo ago
something is off here. naming "cassandra" is not designing a database. it feels like there was some miscommunication along the way
787.
by 8note 7mo ago
it didn't kill ship building, but it did shipping by ship within the US. the US still ends up without a merchant marine, at least compared to if it di have ships moving between US ports and not just arriving at/leaving from US por
788.
by 8note 7mo ago
sounds a bit sketch? learning to do a thing means handling the edge cases, and you cant exactly do that in one pass? when ive learned manual processes its been at least 9 attempts. 3 watching, 3 doing with an expert watching, and 3 with the
789.
by 8note 7mo ago
> But LLMs are hamstrung by their harnesses entirely so. i think anthropic updated something about the compact algorithm recently, and its gone from working well over long times to basically garbage whenever a compact happens
790.
by 8note 7mo ago
interested in what part - i found making qcli agents to run through SOPs was real effective and turned 20min of busy work async. there might be a misattribution though. over time, id say the top down initiatives and quality at tracking them
791.
by 8note 7mo ago
why wouldnt the previous owners just open a new vet clinic, and hore all the same people back? or some manager at it? it must be easy enough to raise that starting money, if the PE firm could get the loan
792.
by 8note 7mo ago
as an iteration: what i'd want from an SRE agent is that it sets up and tests automated alarms i don't want non-determinism in whether my pager goes off when something breaks. I also want the agent to get a first look at issues on
793.
by 8note 7mo ago
if it works, will they keep it suspend even after?
794.
by 8note 7mo ago
even in one agent, a different starting prompt will have you tracing a very different path through the model. maybe it still sends you to the same valley, but there's so many parameters and dimensions that i dont think its very likely
795.
by 8note 7mo ago
i got me a windows mcp setup running in a sandbox, so it can look at screenshots, see the UIA, and click things either by coordinate or by UIA. i let it run overnight against a windows app i was working on, and that got it from mostly not w
796.
by 8note 7mo ago
or moreso, what happens at compact boundaries where the agent completely forgets the intent
797.
by 8note 7mo ago
https://www.hyrumslaw.com/ your implementation is your interface. its a bit naive or hating-your-users to assume your tests are what your users care about. theyre dealing with everything, regardless of what youve tested o
798.
by 8note 7mo ago
hardly. as an alternative, a bunch of people got into their one-person trucks and drove to the store to buy whatever thing would have been efficiently delivered
799.
by 8note 7mo ago
that isnt computer science at all though? if it is, that would be phd research topics, rather than than basics. maybe as software engineering topics, but thats a different discipline
800.
by 8note 7mo ago
but thats what it was like when i started at amazon in 2016? i think the team i was on was a bit of an outlier in terms of owning 40 dumptser fires at once, and the first time reading any one of them was at 2AM because it was down. having a
801.
by 8note 7mo ago
code review is too late to give some of that feedback, and design/requirements documents dont have nearly the standardization of presentation and feedback tools for that to be useable. Amazon does have those things, and has fine tuning
802.
by 8note 7mo ago
Id maybe consider spinning out a different job role for like "review engineer" who's not busy making strategic decisions and near term planning, just making sure the code is actually good still within the engineering IC role,
803.
by 8note 7mo ago
At least with my experience at amazon it wasnt. if i wanted, i could queue up weeks worth of review in a couple days, but that's not getting the whole team more productive. Spending more time on documents and chatting proved much more
804.
by 8note 7mo ago
the tooling doesnt make it easy currently. working at amazon, when I wanted to review code myself through the CR tool, Id still end up publishing it to the whole team and have to add some title shenanigans saying it was a self review or WIP
805.
by 8note 7mo ago
not even that. implementing this requirement could be a general work stoppage whenever the senior engineer is in all day meetings or on vacation With a layout of 4 juniors, 5 intermediates, and 0-1 senior per team, putting all the changes t
806.
by 8note 7mo ago
I think its a question 2 or 3 in a why chain, but 4 and 5 need to be why the agent screwed up, and there needs to be action items that are around giving the ai better guardrails, context, or tooling. "get a person to look at it" i
807.
by 8note 7mo ago
from a devops perspective, if data breeches are hard to deal with, shouldn't be doing them often so we can automate the handling of them? rather than making them difficult to occur but catastrophic because nobody can handle the afterma
808.
by 8note 7mo ago
id.expect COEs to be coming up with AI code action items though, not to have more thorough human checks
809.
by 8note 7mo ago
> senior engineers have always been required to sign off on changes from junior engineers. definitely a team by team question. if it was required it would be a crux rule that the code review isnt approved without an l6 approver.
810.
by 8note 7mo ago
> The problem, I think, is people don't get promoted for preventing issues. cleaning up structural issues across a couple orgs is a senior => principal promo ive seen a couple of times

More ›