bcrosby95

3 ms·

1.
by bcrosby95 9d ago
Pointing to luck renders all advice meaningless.
2.
by bcrosby95 12d ago
I think it's more important. AI gets a lot right, but sometimes it gets things wrong. The document might be the only human authored piece of text, and it will help future agents see that something is incorrect in the implementation
3.
by bcrosby95 12d ago
I've never been much for design docs. But I have some projects that are on again/off again and I can lose my train of thought. It seems like having one of these could help a lot with that.
4.
by bcrosby95 15d ago
> normal people feel, reasonably, that their civic responsibility is to vote in actual elections for the policy they support, not to spend their life in City Hall jawboning. That's not how the vast majority of this works, and the av
5.
by bcrosby95 15d ago
Yeah, we need to go back to names like International Business Machines, fuck this immature "Google" or "Yahoo!" nonsense. Hell, Palantir is named after something in a book for children! Give me something reasonable li
6.
by bcrosby95 16d ago
It's pretty clear once you click on it: > Allow your content to be used to train our models, which makes ChatGPT better for you and everyone who uses it. We take steps to protect your privacy. Learn more
7.
by bcrosby95 17d ago
Yes, my favorite codebase to work in is one full of accurate and long comments that detail that making a function call it never called would cause problems because of the details of a function that gets called 3 layers deeper.
8.
by bcrosby95 17d ago
Meatspace is hard though. But if LLMs solve the virtual part, maybe we can iterate quickly on robots. Also, if you think it's annoying when Claude goes down while coding, just wait until a robot is in the middle of fixing a leak it ju
9.
by bcrosby95 17d ago
Why would they do that? It wouldn't accomplish anything useful.
10.
by bcrosby95 17d ago
The first thing LLMs seem likely to automate is automation itself. I'm curious what the past few hundreds of years of industrialization would have looked like if the first thing they automated was building, designing, and running the
11.
by bcrosby95 18d ago
So we're going to make government weaker, and by doing so, they will stand up to corporations that are now stronger than them? If that's true then Libertarians have a rosier view of government than I do. A regular David vs. Golia
12.
by bcrosby95 19d ago
Never. It would be like laughing at people writing Prolog calling themselves coders.
13.
by bcrosby95 20d ago
People have been "writing code" like this for decades. That a programmer happens to do it doesn't turn it into writing code, no one would have made that claim 25 years ago, and people who aren't programmers wouldn'
14.
by bcrosby95 20d ago
You claim writing is thinking, but imply writing code isn't thinking. My opinion of LLM design review isn't that high - it seems to miss design tweaks that could vastly simplify corner cases. But if your code isn't written f
15.
by bcrosby95 21d ago
They can help with it if you point them in the right direction.
16.
by bcrosby95 22d ago
Yeah, I already don't remember what I had for breakfast two days ago.
17.
by bcrosby95 25d ago
Oh that? That's just Claude being the sassy asshole it is. It loves to write in a way with maximal self-inflating impact.
18.
by bcrosby95 26d ago
Yes, OOP is hard to do right. It's not helped by examples and schools largely teaching from real world nouns. Most people in OOP languages are writing procedural code. For all these reasons I just skip it. I still use OOP languages,
19.
by bcrosby95 1mo ago
The way I usually prevent having to scale out to a bazillion systems is never getting more than 10 users.
20.
by bcrosby95 1mo ago
This post seems very concerned about what a product does - and rightly so. However, it doesn't really talk about figuring out what a product doesn't do. This is a blind spot large enough to fly a 747 full of CVEs through.
21.
by bcrosby95 1mo ago
The first thing this wave of automation seems likely to replace is automation itself. For this reason it's hard for me to give much attention to comparisons to previous industrial revolutions. It would have looked way different if the
22.
by bcrosby95 1mo ago
I think if they are intelligent, intrinsically motivated, and willing to pursue knowledge beyond what the class requires , it probably helps. That last part is key. Intrinsic motivation doesn't mean you pursue it outside normal bound
23.
by bcrosby95 1mo ago
> especially as the session drags on. This is because these harnesses are missing a very important feature. Anything like this needs to be included with every turn, otherwise the LLM quickly drifts. I first noticed it when I wrote a har
24.
by bcrosby95 1mo ago
You mention unions, but what you're leaving out is they have a huge advantage in those countries compared to the US. One big one is that, Union A can boycott a Company B over a dispute with Union C. That is illegal in the US, and it&
25.
by bcrosby95 1mo ago
I can if I want to switch jobs too. Probably not a good idea given the current economic conditions. I'd be all for forcing a decoupling of these things, but I don't see that anywhere on the table, and it would probably run afoul
26.
by bcrosby95 1mo ago
I have a strong dislike for the industry as a whole. There's too many ridiculous situations I've been subject to, along with hearing of some from my friends. My favorite was a friend who had to deliver her baby, alone, in a hallw
27.
by bcrosby95 1mo ago
Our insurance paid for the bill from my wife's surgeon but spent 8 months refusing to pay for literally anything else, including the anesthesia. They said it was "medically unnecessary".
28.
by bcrosby95 1mo ago
I wrote a harness for running tabletop RPGs. One of the key things to keep the LLM behaving correctly (such as not controlling the PCs) was being able to inject instructions with every new prompt, which I don't include in the history.
29.
by bcrosby95 1mo ago
This was written over a decade ago. I'd take it in that context. Lots of the tech they're talking about was being cargo culted en-masse. So yes, pick boring tech, defined as the tech you know the sharp edges of.
30.
by bcrosby95 2mo ago
Quality assurance and test plans don't catch slop. They just test your code. It can't prove the absence of bugs. In general, the way we still do it is: some basic static analysis finding anti-patterns, but the meat of it is, and

More ›