MrScruff

5 ms·

31.
by MrScruff 4mo ago
This is true, but what is also true is that with each new generation of models (and not just for code generation) it becomes less and less true.
32.
by MrScruff 4mo ago
I’d probably word it differently but I agree with much of the sentiment here. I’m also reminded of the stat where 93% of drivers rated themselves as above average.
33.
by MrScruff 5mo ago
Practically, this is just about confidence values, anticipated blast radius and balancing testing vs review overhead.
34.
by MrScruff 5mo ago
It's ASI with jagged intelligence, which is probably what it will remain for a while. It still sounds to me like remarkable automation rather than something that's expanding the frontier of human knowledge, for now at least.
35.
by MrScruff 5mo ago
Indeed. To be honest, I think everyone on HN is aware of how LLMs work at this point, it’s not actually adding a great deal to the discussion to keep going on about autocomplete or ‘stochastic parrots’.
36.
by MrScruff 5mo ago
The results being a lot better crafted by hand I would agree with, if one removes any notion of a time constraint. Sometimes the comparison point is between the LLM authored software or nothing at all.
37.
by MrScruff 5mo ago
Which is what?
38.
by MrScruff 5mo ago
I think the other aspect to this which you allude to at the end is that all of these arguments start with the assumption that all human software engineers produce high quality code that meets the requirements, but obviously that’s very much
39.
by MrScruff 5mo ago
Is your argument that there is no imaginable situation where someone who was competent at software development could find use for a semi-automated tool for writing software? That would imply that either the person in question has infinite t
40.
by MrScruff 5mo ago
I'm not saying it's rational or fair.
41.
by MrScruff 5mo ago
Speaking as someone who works in the industry, I haven't really heard this sentiment. Artists are predominantly hostile to diffusion models, but optimistic about LLMs and their ability to help them write tools and scripts even if they&
42.
by MrScruff 5mo ago
Using LLMs for creative work is quite different to using diffusion models for creative work. It normally means writing tools or automation processes to enhance the creative flow, not replacing the creative input of a human.
43.
by MrScruff 5mo ago
Super cool. I loved Galways's C64 tunes as a kid, especially Wizball & Parallax. I remember trying to write my own player in assembly (yet another unfinished project).
44.
by MrScruff 6mo ago
UBI is just a massive extension of the welfare state. Governments can’t afford the current welfare spending, so where is the money going to come from? What do you think is going to happen to the markets when a large amount of the middle cla
45.
by MrScruff 6mo ago
I think it's not that difficult to see why a technology that will likely trigger widespread unemployment during a cost of living crisis, an arms race with China, along with all the alignment concerns, might not be hugely popular with t
46.
by MrScruff 6mo ago
It's a good question, I've wondered that myself. I haven't used GLM-5 with CC but I've used GLM-4.7 a fair amount, often swapping back and forth with Sonnet/Opus. The difference is fairly obvious - on occasions I&#x
47.
by MrScruff 6mo ago
> This is speculative, but I suspect that if we dropped one of the latest, most capable open-weight LLMs, such as GLM-5, into a similar harness, it could likely perform on par with GPT-5.4 in Codex or Claude Opus 4.6 in Claude Code. Unle
48.
by MrScruff 6mo ago
I've been playing with the open models since the original llama leak. They're getting better over time, are useful for tasks of moderate complexity and it's just cool to have a binary blob of knowledge that you can run locall
49.
by MrScruff 6mo ago
Haven't really tried GLM5 much but I've used 4.7 quite a bit and it was pretty far from competing with Sonnet at the time, although I saw claims online to the contrary.
50.
by MrScruff 6mo ago
Calling everyone you disagree with a 'bro' doesn't make your point any more convincing.
51.
by MrScruff 6mo ago
I would say thinking about the indended audience for your creative outlet is a good discipline - even if it's only one person. It often gives the project more of a focus which helps with motivation and makes it more enjoyable.
52.
by MrScruff 7mo ago
Honestly a lot of useful software is ‘unimportant’ in the sense that the consequences of introducing a bug or bad code smell aren’t that significant, and can be addressed if needed. It might well be for many projects the time saved not revi
53.
by MrScruff 7mo ago
For sure, but I haven't written a single piece of software where security would ever be considered a factor. Not all software runs on the web, not all software deals with accounts etc.
54.
by MrScruff 7mo ago
Turns out there are whole categories of software where 'extremely fast and good enough' is what matters, even for skilled software developers.
55.
by MrScruff 7mo ago
I see a lot of people talk about 'insecure code' and while I don't doubt that's true, there's a lot of software development where security isn't actually a concern because there's no need for the software
56.
by MrScruff 7mo ago
I think this is too broad. If, for example, I get Claude to set up a fine tuning pipeline for rf-detr and it one shots it for me, what have I lost? A learning opportunity to understand the details of how to go about this process, sure. But
57.
by MrScruff 7mo ago
Yeah, I used to enjoy writing code but after a while I realised I actually more enjoy creating tools that I (and other people) liked to use. Now I can do that really quickly even with my very limited free time, at a higher level of abstract
58.
by MrScruff 7mo ago
I think on the go is the point. I love my AirPod Pros but I wouldn’t listen to them sat at my desk.
59.
by MrScruff 7mo ago
That would imply that there will never be an adequate open weights coding model. That might be true, but seems unlikely.
60.
by MrScruff 7mo ago
I’m building an application for documenting modular patches, mostly for my own use case. It uses ML to recognise the patch points, knobs and toggles from a photo of the front panel. You can then build racks from the scanned modules and then

More ›