dcre

11 ms·

181.
by dcre 9mo ago
I really don’t think search captures the thing’s ability to understand complex relationships. Finding real bugs in 2000 line PRs isn’t search.
182.
by dcre 9mo ago
Likewise!
183.
by dcre 9mo ago
To me, debunking hype has always felt like arguing with an advertisement. A good read about that: https://www.liberalcurrents.com/deflating-hype-wont-save-us/
184.
by dcre 9mo ago
https://crespo.business/
185.
by dcre 9mo ago
I don't get who is saying this dreaded "you'll be left behind." The only place I see that is from straight-up slop accounts in the Twitter algo feed. Surely you're not letting those people make you feel bad. > Yo
186.
by dcre 9mo ago
This is the post that made jj click for me, and not coincidentally it is about a rebase operation that feels complicated in git but trivial in jj. https://lottia.net/notes/0013-git-jujutsu-miniature.html
187.
by dcre 9mo ago
In about 12 years of using git (jj user now) I almost never rebased through the CLI, but I found shuffling branches around in a GUI pretty intuitive. I liked GitUp[0], which gave me undo way before jj existed. The common view that a Git GUI
188.
by dcre 9mo ago
There’s tooling like https://github.com/LucioFranco/jj-spr for managing stacks of PRs, but for stacks of 2 or 3 it’s not too bad to do it manually.
189.
An FAQ on Reinforcement Learning Environments(epoch.ai)
2 points by dcre 9mo ago|0 comments
190.
by dcre 9mo ago
I've used both CC and OpenCode quite a bit and while I like both and especially appreciate the work around OpenTUI, experience-wise I see almost no difference between the two. Maybe it's because my computer is fast and I use Ghost
191.
by dcre 9mo ago
I was thinking of that when I wrote it.
192.
by dcre 9mo ago
Counterpoint: no, they're not. The test in the article is very silly.
193.
Epiplexity: Rethinking Information for Computationally Bounded Intelligence(arxiv.org)
5 points by dcre 9mo ago|0 comments
194.
by dcre 9mo ago
Pretty sure I have seen them imply in one of the panel discussions on their YouTube channel (can't remember which) that they get unlimited use of the best models. I remember them talking about records for the most spent in a day or som
195.
by dcre 9mo ago
I agree! I just don’t think the friction has to come from tediously trawling through a bunch of web pages that don’t contain the answer to your question.
196.
by dcre 9mo ago
This is just not true. I have wasted many hours looking for answers to hard-to-phrase questions and learned very little from the process. If an LLM can get me the same result in 30 seconds, it's very hard for me to see that as a bad th
197.
Reflections on Vibe Researching(joshuagans.substack.com)
2 points by dcre 9mo ago|1 comments
198.
by dcre 9mo ago
Thanks for replying! I disagree that current LLMs can't help build tooling that improves rigor and lets you manage greater complexity. However, I agree that most people are not doing this. Some threads from a colleague on this topic:
199.
by dcre 10mo ago
I see this response a lot but I think it's self-contradictory. Building faster, understanding faster, refactoring faster — these do allow skilled developers to work on bigger things. When it takes you one minute instead of an hour to f
200.
by dcre 10mo ago
Very impressed at the rate of high-quality interesting posts from this author.
201.
by dcre 10mo ago
Reasonable, and I get it because I did the same thing before agents got good this year (obviously good, I say again) — I felt the trajectory was clear but didn’t want to sound like the shills and wackos. On the other hand I think accusing Z
202.
by dcre 10mo ago
I think that’s roughly right — both then and now he has stressed that people think it does something but it fails to do so. However I do think I’ve seen a subtle shift in phrasing in both him and other critics as it has become more obvious
203.
by dcre 10mo ago
In fact I do! "I know I sound like an asshole, but I’ve got a serious question: what can LLMs do today that they couldn’t a year ago? Agents don’t work. LLMs - read stuff, write stuff, analyze stuff, search for stuff, 'write code&
204.
by dcre 10mo ago
This is a great read. I just want to point out what great marketing this and the WSJ story are. People reading it think they’re sticking it to Anthropic by noticing that Claude is not that good at running a business, meanwhile the unstated
205.
by dcre 10mo ago
It does not count AI summaries; they break that out explicitly. I don’t think it includes other integrations either, though it’s less clear. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46395744
206.
by dcre 10mo ago
I don’t think that’s right, and it’s telling that this is the response every time I mention these numbers. The numbers I’ve seen are Gemini web and mobile app users, which are explicitly distinguished from AI summaries and AI mode in search
207.
by dcre 10mo ago
How do you reconcile the sense that there's a vibe shift with the usage numbers: about a billion weekly users of ChatGPT and Gemini and continuing to grow.
208.
by dcre 10mo ago
The brand-name ones are surprisingly durable. Can’t speak to the cheaper knockoffs.
209.
Distributional AGI Safety (DeepMind)(arxiv.org)
4 points by dcre 10mo ago|0 comments
210.
by dcre 10mo ago
The bits that stand out to me are the non-question questions. “Their headline?” “Scientists are thriving. The workforce is managing. But creatives?” “The top trust destroyer?”

More ›