dkersten

6 ms·

61.
by dkersten 5mo ago
Ah… that’s a reasonable point. Yes, the difference between a high-trust team and what you described is night and day. I suppose for those situations there’s a much bigger incentive to just throw AI at it, which explains why the big corporat
62.
by dkersten 5mo ago
That doesn’t conflict with my statement. Before: One person writes the code (and likely understands it thoroughly), another person reviews the code to spot obvious mistakes or shortcomings. Now: AI writes the code, a person reviews it to s
63.
by dkersten 5mo ago
Agreed. Reviewing code takes so much longer and is far more exhausting than writing it, and you still don’t understand the logic as well or intuitively as you would if you write it.
64.
by dkersten 5mo ago
Sure they do: it’s easy to get 10x gains if you were only producing 0.1x before.
65.
by dkersten 5mo ago
> eventually, you'll want to add a feature that clashes with that invariant I find this to be a big problem with spec driven development: no spec survives the real world, some invariant that was in the spec will inevitably turn out
66.
by dkersten 5mo ago
> which people find they need to do for LLMs to work at all anyway Everything we have to do for AI to function well, would help humans to function better too. If you take the things for AI, but do them for humans instead, that human will
67.
by dkersten 5mo ago
The same was said about Compiz, but it turned out to be a passing gimmick that looked flashy but didn’t really add anything. Sure you could always make up reasons why it’s useful, I remember the same about Compiz, but… is it really? I could
68.
by dkersten 5mo ago
That’s what I came here to ask. Their demo looks like Compiz back in the day: ok, cool, you have 3d effects, but… why? What does it do for me? Compiz 3d effects were ultimately a useless gimmick and I predict this is too.
69.
by dkersten 5mo ago
It was less a comment about the format and more a comment about the application used to do the editing.
70.
by dkersten 5mo ago
Most people edit documents in Microsoft word, though, so it didn’t seem too far fetched that LLM content would be edited similarly, especially as more and more non-programmers use it.
71.
by dkersten 5mo ago
For simple workflows or once-off workflows, that's a good approach. For long running repeatable workflows (eg you want to leave your agent running over night, you want to run the same workflows over and over in different projects, or m
72.
by dkersten 5mo ago
I've been building a workflow engine for agent orchestration and the workflows are just data for the engine to execute. While I haven't experimented with it yet, I envision that an LLM would be rather good at generating the workfl
73.
by dkersten 5mo ago
Oh, yes! As someone who has dabbled in card tricks, this so much. People don't understand how its done and can't imagine or conceive of a way that it possibly could be done, so they attribute it to literal magic or demons or whate
74.
by dkersten 5mo ago
This is something I realised late last year while using Claude Code. The LLM shouldn't be the one in control of the workflow, because the LLM can make mistakes, skip steps, hallucinate steps, etc. Its also wasteful of tokens. I'm
75.
by dkersten 5mo ago
Given the quality of Claude code lately, I wouldn’t trust them in financial services.
76.
by dkersten 5mo ago
> That's not what script kiddies are at all. Sure it is. The new age of script kiddies: they don’t know how to do it for themselves, but they can run a script (or tell the AI to) to do it for them. > That's a big assumption
77.
by dkersten 5mo ago
> How do you know what testing procedures they use? We don’t, but we can see the end result, so we know whatever they do isn’t adequate and it suggests they value shipping fast over quality or even listening to customer feedback. > Do
78.
by dkersten 5mo ago
They’ve said themselves that Claude code is 100% vibe coded now. That certainly meets the criteria of “script kiddies” and “high on their own supply”. The negative connotations are there on purpose because of the bugs and issues that these
79.
by dkersten 6mo ago
I’m a big fan of @xstate/store!
80.
by dkersten 6mo ago
I was an i3 and away user before switching to Niri. I generally use one workspace per task with some workspaces dedicated to specific apps (eg my browser workspace). Every app is full screen, always. I tend to use niri’s scrolling mainly fo
81.
by dkersten 6mo ago
I noticed the same, I had to basically force disable the tailwind LSP in my config to stop it from running since I don’t use tailwind. Also I’ve noticed the rust LSP causes the Zed text editor to lag badly when there’s a lot of warnings. Fo
82.
by dkersten 6mo ago
I just wish they made multi monitor work, something visual studio had 25 years ago.
83.
by dkersten 6mo ago
This is also how other cloud providers do it, eg DigitalOcean.
84.
by dkersten 6mo ago
Eh you say that every time and yet it keeps happening.
85.
by dkersten 6mo ago
And every single time what they release is underwhelming. Remember how Sam spent like a year talking about how scary close GPT-5 was to AGI and then when it did finally come out... it was kinda meh.
86.
by dkersten 6mo ago
I’m building something similar. It’s not public yet because it’s still early and I’m still working on exactly what it is supposed to be. But the idea is similar in that I start with a spec and feed the LLM context that is a projection of th
87.
by dkersten 6mo ago
I was typing quickly on my phone. I meant “quite”, “I find Kimi quite good”
88.
by dkersten 6mo ago
I find Kimi white good if you ask it for critical feedback. It’s BRUTAL but offers solutions.
89.
by dkersten 7mo ago
I’ve never had any problems with MiniMax. I wouldn’t call the speed fast exactly, but it’s faster than GLM and seems similar to Opus. It’s been fast enough that I’ve been using it as my main model (M2.7 and before that, M2.5). Opus still do
90.
by dkersten 7mo ago
I’ve also never hit the MiniMax limits and M2.7 is pretty good. Not as good as Opus, but substantially cheaper!

More ›