overgard

29 ms·

691.
by overgard 9mo ago
I think the difference with Copilot vs other tools is how it's being pushed on us, and where it's being pushed. Because Copilot is bundled with software people need , it's going to get a lot more scrutiny compared to AI prod
692.
by overgard 9mo ago
Some of it's whistle blowers, some of it is pretty simple math and analysis. Some of it's just common sense. Constantly raising money isn't sustainable and just increases obligations dramatically.. if these companies didn&#x2
693.
by overgard 9mo ago
> Sam Altman has made similar statements, and Chinese companies also often serve their models very cheaply. Sam Altman got fired by his own board for dishonesty, and a lot of the original OpenAI people have left. I don't know the gu
694.
by overgard 9mo ago
From what I've read, every major AI player is losing a (lot) of money on running LLMs, even just with inference. It's hard to say for sure because they don't publish the financials (or if they do, it tends to be obfuscated),
695.
by overgard 9mo ago
I can see how it could be fun, but I'm a bit skeptical that it's a practical path forward. The security problems it has (prompt injection for example) don't seem solvable with LLMs in general
696.
by overgard 9mo ago
I guess that's one reason. If I'm perfectly honest I always turn Siri off because I don't trust Siri either; but that's less of a "malicious actors" thing and more of a "it doesn't work well thing&quo
697.
by overgard 9mo ago
Maybe this is just a skill issue on my part, but I'm still trying to wrap my head around the workflow of running multiple claude agents at once. How do they not conflict with each other? Also how do you have a project well specified en
698.
by overgard 9mo ago
I think you're assuming a lot about my prompting. I know to be specific with LLMs
699.
by overgard 9mo ago
Unfortunately I think I cleaned up the code before committing it, so I don't have an exact example! I did actually read that usage page though after looking at those tests, and that helped me in fixing the tests (maybe in retrospect I
700.
by overgard 9mo ago
I'm curious, outside of AI enthusiasts have people found value with using Clawdbot, and if so, what are they doing with it? From my perspective it seems like the people legitimately busy enough that they actually need an AI assistant a
701.
by overgard 9mo ago
December. Previous job had cursor and copilot automatically reviewing PRs.
702.
by overgard 9mo ago
I actually have used other LLMs to review the code, in the past (not today, but in the past). It's fine, but it doesn't tend to catch things like "this technically works but it's loading a footgun." For example, the
703.
by overgard 9mo ago
I asked Codex to write some unit tests for Redux today. At first glance it looked fine, and I continued on. I then went back to add a test by hand, and after looking more closely at the output there were like 50 wtf worthy things scattered
704.
by overgard 9mo ago
I'm not sure I understand the point of this. If mistakes (or lies) aren't tolerable in the output, then whoever ran the agent should be responsible for reviewing the output and the resulting actions. I don't see how LLMs can
705.
by overgard 9mo ago
Well, if you consider Maslow's hierarchy of needs, "creatively enabled" would be a luxury at the top of the pyramid with "self actualization". Luxuries don't matter if the things at the bottom of the pyramid ar
706.
by overgard 9mo ago
FWIW, "Careless People" is an excellent read.
707.
by overgard 9mo ago
> Point is though, you don't need to see the code to debug it, so the fact that the code was generated should not be the thing holding you back. This sounds like an awful way to debug. Operating on less information just makes things
708.
by overgard 9mo ago
I think fundamentals are more important than ever. How can you debug without understanding it? "Claude please rewrite" is not good engineering.
709.
by overgard 9mo ago
I'm kind of surprised this didn't happen sooner. From an ethical standpoint, I think it's .. murky. Not ads themselves, but because the AI is, at least partially, likely trained on data scraped from the web, which is then mor
710.
by overgard 9mo ago
I think that demonstrates more about you than it does about him. Asking "how did you come to this number" is a valid question anytime someone gives you a number that would be hard to calculate. Asking for receipts is not the same
711.
by overgard 9mo ago
I don't see a reason to think we're not going to hit a plateua sooner or later (and probably sooner). You can't scale your way out of hallucinations, and you can't keep raising tens of billions to train these things with
712.
by overgard 10mo ago
I haven't followed everything Scott Adams has done recently (largely because most of his stuff ended up paywalled), but in the past I'd note that he'd have an interesting take on something, possibly hard to defend but not int
713.
by overgard 10mo ago
I don't think "medication stops working when people stop taking it" is really a terrible thing.
714.
by overgard 10mo ago
To be fair, 12 step programs would be a counter argument. The maintenance of homeostasis requires constant attention in those programs. You could say overeating is different from other addictions, and I would agree, but there are a lot of s
715.
by overgard 10mo ago
Thanks for the interesting perspective! I'm curious, is the metallic tang because of iron content or somethig else?
716.
by overgard 10mo ago
I use it for health advice sometimes.. but.. doesn't this seem like a massive source of liability? Are they just assuming the investor dollars will pay for the lawyers?
717.
by overgard 10mo ago
Your post sounds like "bad things can happen so why bother". Having a good diet isn't "slavish devotion", it's more like "don't eat something obviously terrible"
718.
by overgard 10mo ago
People are on ketogenic diets for years and even decades with no adverse affects. There's nothing wrong with getting energy from other sources, your body can manage it fine.
719.
by overgard 10mo ago
Carbohydrates are sugars (from the first sentence on wikipedia): "A carbohydrate (/ˌkɑːrboʊˈhaɪdreɪt/) is a sugar (saccharide) or a sugar derivative." Saying you need "50-75% of your energy from [sugar]" illust
720.
by overgard 10mo ago
$25,000 in 1969 has the same buying power as approximately $220,000 to $226,000 today In terms of 2016, from gemini: > In 2016, $25,000 from 1969 was worth approximately $163,490. > Based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI), $1 in 1969

More ›