exfalso

4 ms·

1.
by exfalso 11d ago
It would have been a case of isolating exactly what functionality is needed and wiring that up with the actual requests. Not like a full pass-through proxy. This is what we've been doing in our company as well
2.
by exfalso 12d ago
To be fair, this is a classic prisoner's dilemma. If the others don't play along then there is no benefit at all, it's all negative for Anthropic.
3.
by exfalso 12d ago
No that's not what they did, they exposed jfrog raw. It would have been so extremely simple to gate services they need the llm to access... I mean, jfrog was not written with this kind of threat model in mind, and neither were a lot of
4.
by exfalso 18d ago
What do you use as a European CDN atm?
5.
by exfalso 2mo ago
It does happen, but it's very very rare. I met maybe 2 people in my career I could do this with.
6.
by exfalso 3mo ago
I understand. So don't use them. There are plenty of OS alternatives
7.
by exfalso 3mo ago
What are you talking about. You think service providers can backdoor aes-gcm? There will always be technology that they cannot get around. The only way to backdoor is to explicitly change the encryption.
8.
by exfalso 3mo ago
There are ways to do it correctly. You just end up spending a lot of time conceptualizing and refining abstractions. To me the issue is more that conceptualizing requires a certain state of mind. Before llms it was 10% hard thinking 90% imp
9.
by exfalso 3mo ago
They will most certainly cut subscription access, same as Anthropic. It is inevitable that they will go down the same lockin+squeeze route. I unsubscribed from Claude a couple of weeks ago, on gpt now. However, Openai will have to make a si
10.
by exfalso 4mo ago
Yeah that also sounds realistic, and actually there's evidence of this dulling effect from even before llms. The attention economy has been literally streamlining.. well, the road to death. And nobody is angry. I can spin this in a wei
11.
by exfalso 4mo ago
Agree on the knock-on effects. My prediction is deflation. Money will be worth more and more. As a consequence governments will have to step in to ensure inflation(with e.g. universal income), otherwise the economy stops. But honestly I&#x2
12.
by exfalso 4mo ago
What's the point of that? That sounds like the most boring life. You want to rot away on a yacht? Private chef? Are you kidding? Help family? Sure, although you don't need that much money for that. Friends? Ehh not very smart, jus
13.
by exfalso 4mo ago
My point was that there isn't anything I could do with that money, and neither can the vast majority of people in the world. So I would immediately try to pass it on to people who have better use for it Wishing for 1B is completely non
14.
by exfalso 4mo ago
Nonsense. What the hell would you do with 1B? Give it to charities maybe. Maybe set up an investment where dividends are paid to charity. Running out of ideas
15.
by exfalso 5mo ago
That's.. not even close to being the case. It's literally a series of ambiguous questions and strategic decisions. Non-ambiguous is like a first semester algorithms class in university.
16.
by exfalso 6mo ago
I guess the new "Code's compiling!" is "Claude's lunching!"
17.
by exfalso 6mo ago
Getting consistent 500s for any api call
18.
by exfalso 6mo ago
It's to prevent distillation. Duh
19.
by exfalso 6mo ago
It's because of simple FOMO of companies. If they don't "invest" in it they will be left behind. Which is true. However, the way they invest is equally (if not more) important. E.g. MS is a good example of how not to
20.
by exfalso 6mo ago
Regret? Of what? The tech is here. You won't slow it down by not using it. People need to either adapt by moving to more and more niche areas, or become the person to be retained when the efficiency gains materialize. We still don&#x
21.
by exfalso 7mo ago
It's failing when there is no data in the training set, and there are no patterns to replicate in the existing code base. I can give you many, many examples of where it failed for me: 1. Efficient implementation of Union-Find: comple
22.
by exfalso 7mo ago
Nope. Especially with these agents the thinking trace can get very large. No human will ever read it, and the agent will fill up their context with garbage trying to look for information. I understand the drive for stabilizing control and c
23.
by exfalso 7mo ago
This is a terrible idea
24.
by exfalso 7mo ago
Yes that's the idea. The expansion simply means that the window of migration will close. Once it's closed, your galaxy is cut off and will run out of fuel sooner than the high-density area.
25.
by exfalso 7mo ago
There's a fun hypothesis I've read about somewhere, goes something like this: As the universe expands the gap between galaxies widens until they start "disappearing" as no information can travel anymore between them. The
26.
by exfalso 8mo ago
Perhaps the out of job prediction is actually reversed. True, LLMs will become an efficiency increasing tool. But in terms of job security, doesn't that mean that if your whole job can be driven by an LLM then demand for that job decre
27.
by exfalso 8mo ago
> Maybe when AIs are able to say: "I don't know how this works" or "This doesn't work like that at all." they will be more helpful. Funny you say that, I encountered this in a seemingly simple task. Opus ins
28.
by exfalso 8mo ago
I have the same experience and still use it. It's just that I learned to use it for simplistic work. I sometimes try to give it more complex tasks but it keeps failing. I don't think it's bad to keep trying, especially as p
29.
by exfalso 8mo ago
Interesting. I've had it fail on much simpler tasks. Example: was writing a flatbuffers routine which translated a simple type schema to fbs reflection schema. I was thinking well this is quite simple, surely Opus would have no trouble
30.
by exfalso 8mo ago
Exact same experience. Here's what I find Claude Code (Opus) useful for: 1. Copy-pasting existing working code with small variations. If the intended variation is bigger then it fails to bring productivity gains, because it's almo

More ›