whstl

5 ms·

61.
by whstl 1mo ago
Yeah, It’s in the system prompt, Claude will tell you if you ask why it’s using Python. My theory is that Anthropic is just a vibe-coding company. Their goal is to capture the attention of white-collar non-coders, since programmers will jum
62.
by whstl 1mo ago
I agree. It requires good judgement, domain knowledge, good work ethic. Grifters who think the LLM can do it all for them will definitely not survive in a competitive market.
63.
by whstl 1mo ago
About pro-AI boosters: One of the people in the company I work for/with is a non-programmer that has a “vibe coding consulting” gig on the side. Basically half of their Linkedin is about how they’re shipping features at half the speed
64.
by whstl 1mo ago
> Custom chimes and not having a wire are both extremely reasonable requirements to follow. I never said otherwise? Perhaps it was unproductive because you’re assuming I’m making a point while I’m not? My point was entirely that other pe
65.
by whstl 1mo ago
I am not saying every product has to be the absolute minimum, that's an absurdist interpretation of what I mean. I am saying that people can call something "overengineered" and "it was the requirement" is not a defe
66.
by whstl 1mo ago
> I agree that requirements need to be kept in check to avoid over engineering Then we are in agreement! The person who originally called it "overengineered" wasn't me, it was another user. I did joke that an electric do
67.
by whstl 1mo ago
And you're still failing the challenge of understanding my point, over and over. The person who gave an opinion about whether this is overengineered or not was Lukeify, not me: > You are super-sensitive to over-engineering, so you
68.
by whstl 1mo ago
I have something that injects my relatively small prompt every message, and it still disobeys me after 10 messages or so. The violation above was precisely in this situation :/
69.
by whstl 1mo ago
I am also trying to be diplomatic and I would like for a more charitable interpretation of my messages. My whole point is that "something being in the requirements" is not a shield against something being considered "over eng
70.
by whstl 1mo ago
String breaks. Hole attracts insects. Bell is too quiet or too heavy. Now we're in "under-engineering" territory. Also not good.
71.
by whstl 1mo ago
I am just saying over and over that the over-engineering part itself can come from a "requirement", which seems to be the contentious position here. Some other people mentioned the doorbell project was over-engineering and I just
72.
by whstl 1mo ago
> Your whole case rests on the insistence that OP's core requirement is no good I never said it wasn't good. I just said it led to over-engineering a doorbell. "Good" or "bad" are words you're putting
73.
by whstl 1mo ago
It should be considered fair to say that some things are over-engineered in relation to others. This is a matter of (hopefully informed) opinion after all. Also opinions will change after time, or after analyzing the problem space better. G
74.
by whstl 1mo ago
I don't think there should be a line. But it should be considered fair to say that some things are over-engineered in relation to others. It should also be considered ok to call things over-engineered. OP himself did.
75.
by whstl 1mo ago
Oh trust me, we felt really really bad blocking the whole country, and it took weeks of attempts avoiding it. Meta bots are also problematic, as they seem to be quite buggy. But the volume was nowhere near the hundreds of bots from China :&
76.
by whstl 1mo ago
I'm not sure I agree. It's easy to "give" instructions, but Claude routinely "forgets" to follow certain instructions, such as "always using the Edit Tool". Just this week it started to use bash with
77.
by whstl 1mo ago
> Yes, and the person engaged with them is pointing out that more complex solutions exist because someone added other requirements. Precisely. The Wi-Fi and Linux solution that was called over-engineered just happened to have different r
78.
by whstl 1mo ago
I'm not really passing judgement on the project itself, or its validity, and I think it's cool. I'm perfectly fine with someone saying "I over-engineered this" or "I hand made this". I do this all the time
79.
by whstl 1mo ago
I never claimed I wasn't over-engineering the line of thought, though. :) I'm perfectly fine with people having fun or over-engineering stuff, I'm just pointing out that it's still over-engineered in the end. Which is 10
80.
by whstl 1mo ago
I disagree. IMO this mindset is not how you make good engineering or good products. As an engineer (the traditional kind), I don't really appreciate nor can I afford the "not my problem" attitude of doing engineering in a vac
81.
by whstl 1mo ago
I didn't miss it. I have acknowledged the requirements and have challenged them. What I am stating is that "it was in the requirements" is not a "get out of jail card" when someone says it's over-engineered. Al
82.
by whstl 1mo ago
My team runs a quite popular website, #1 or #2 in the market depending on the region. Several million visits per day. Around June/July we got a 10x boost out of nowhere, and it started affecting performance for users, increased hosting
83.
by whstl 1mo ago
This is an extremely loaded request that once again shows lacks of familiarity with legal systems. Prosecutor dismissals don't and shouldn't generate published decisions or press coverage the same way trials do. Why should they
84.
by whstl 1mo ago
Challenge accepted: "Similar functionality" here is the same doorbells that have existed for over a century. Done. :) If the requirements and constraints come from you, then saying "those are the requirements" doesn&#x27
85.
by whstl 1mo ago
“I was only following the requirements” at this point must be the Nurnberg defence of over engineering. If it quacks like a duck, doesn’t matter what you call it: it was over engineering.
86.
by whstl 1mo ago
Once again: Erforderlich, not notwendig. And nope, nope, nope. It only goes to court if the police investigation supports it wasn't self-defence, and a public prosecutor decides to move the case forward. The realistic endpoint for a c
87.
by whstl 1mo ago
But if the "mildest mean available " of self-defence against a knife assailant is a gun, the a gun is the most appropriate, simply because others aren't available. Naturally pretty much nobody has a gun, so not a problem, bu
88.
by whstl 1mo ago
About Germany, §32 StGB doesn't require proportionality, the test is "Erforderlichkeit" or "necessity". So if you only have a gun and get attacked by a knife, you don't have to "make things even". Of
89.
by whstl 2mo ago
It depends. Telecoms, kinda. They will try to force this on you via contract. You can say no, but they will lie to your face that it's impossible. You can always get a pre-paid, too. I witnessed the same situation (forced by contract
90.
by whstl 2mo ago
If you have an app, you'll notice immediately that a payment bounced, via notification. If not, you'll get a letter informing you that it bounced. Also: it takes A LOT of letters and court orders for them to cut your utilities. I&

More ›