pdimitar

4 ms·

31.
by pdimitar 2mo ago
I am not quite sure what point you are making here, admitting it plainly. I was just saying to my parent poster that their non-determinism percentages are too pessimistic. Sure the LLMs are not 100% deterministic; that's a sad fact of
32.
by pdimitar 2mo ago
I have found, both in my commercial and OSS work, that getting better at producing protection wards reduces the non-determinism to somewhere in-between 1-10%. Case in point: writing our own linters.
33.
by pdimitar 2mo ago
I imagine this comes with some credentialism and networking i.e. companies ask each other whether person X is good? If so, I can see how easily the current difficulties in the labor market can be overcome that way.
34.
by pdimitar 2mo ago
Which business areas, programming languages / frameworks, which geo areas?
35.
by pdimitar 2mo ago
Do you have a link?
36.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
That would be true insofar as another premise is true: large backlog means we are drowned in business work and the internal cleanups that are very important constantly get kicked down the road. I started pushing back and the backlog at leas
37.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
As a guy who was a part of projects with an infinitely growing backlog (multiple times), I can tell you for certain that _not_ periodically addressing parts of your backlog absolutely will stop you from making more money; even lose you some
38.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
Popular view to dunk on meaningless perfectionists, sure, but your comment conveniently does not address "let's have this architecture because we know these new requirements are coming and we know we can't accommodate them wi
39.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
My only half-decent guess: they deem it too big and risky and believe they'll lose revenue while working on it and ironing out remaining kinks. Claude Code is likely not well-specified and it's a product of rapid iteration and now
40.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
I hear you on the worry, I have the same (and probably so do most devs even). But IMO the endless churning of code will slow down, if it has not already. Quantity does not equal quality as we know, it even erodes it. There are already consu
41.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
CEOs love to promise the sky and the stars. Color me unimpressed. Now whether they can do it -- that's a separate, and a much more interesting, discussion.
42.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
Even worse: it's much safer to assume you'll hire the wrong humans, most of the time.
43.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
I didn't claim that the cost is the prohibiting factor at all. Obviously they gave Jarred free Fable access and to do as his pleases. The cost was an FYI tidbit and nothing more. What I argued was that you seemed to have been arguing a
44.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
True on the premise, remains to be seen if that's what's going to happen in practice. In my work I have Fable/Opus add bespoke linters and tie them to verify/precommit tasks (including in CI) so nothing of the reworks an
45.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
Good question. I'd guess they didn't want community split?
46.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
Maybe it's one of the cases when techies call the shots? I can understand people being more sold on Rust compared to Zig -- there are legitimate differences on the memory safety front and I can see how people will prefer one or the oth
47.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
It's really not about a PL runtime vs. an agent harness, it's about how spaghetti and complex the code is. I do get your point though.
48.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
I know what Fable did for just 5x6h sessions, singular agent, for my professional work. Jarred used many agents and they worked 24/7. It tracks for me. So yes, I do believe it. What makes you skeptical?
49.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
I don't work for them and I don't know their priorities. I can only speculate they're not okay with it but no idea why exactly.
50.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
Yep, same thought. And it seems Anthropic agrees.
51.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
As much as an enthusiast dev like myself hates it -- this is innately true, way too often. I am 46 y/o and still excited to code and solve problems with code and I still have trouble to admit to myself sometimes that people make dozens
52.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
> But the whole point of their product is that it supposedly nullifies such "business" concerns around the use of technology, by making it cheap and fast to build whatever you like automatically. This is a spectrum, it's
53.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
> I just don’t see how one can say that building things reliably good is easy now when the company providing these tools can’t even do it well. I don't know how you can't see it, to me it's blindingly obvious: risk avers
54.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
Definitely. Sadly "capital that is not looking to maximize returns" is a very tall order in the last 20+ years.
55.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
And who might that be, I wonder? The company that seems more worried about executive bonuses than to adhere to its mission, for at least a decade now? Perhaps a certain one whose name starts with M and ends with ozilla? Purely random though
56.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
Yep, and I came to HN to make sure. Happened literally less than 20 minutes ago.
57.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
SQLite creators explicitly warn against using SQLite on a networked file system btw.
58.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
I don't disagree. I can only assume it's defaulted to off due to many people working on big codebases and there constantly evicting cache would objectively slow them down. But, far from ideal for everyone else.
59.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
OP said here that their team was familiar with Python and not with Rust. It's as simple as that. I replied that a frontier LLM can both write code in Rust _and_ educate you. And got down voted.
60.
by pdimitar 3mo ago
Don't forget cross-compilation and a single binary. Not small advantages in _many_ scenarios.

More ›