Knowing both doctors and nurses before AI scribes, actually hand writing notes isn’t usually done in front of the patient. They make quick notes so they keep up with the conversation and then when they need to do long form, they reference their scribbles but do the rest from memory at the END of the day.
For every one person that says they mind, it adds likely an additional margin of error AND time to their day. So I really disagree with making people’s lives harder. That’s why technology exists…
And more and more of these systems are on device models, not cloud compute. So I don’t see that argument either
I’m not sure I understand. Babysitting models is not a multiplier IMO. If you have done 1000s of turns your harness should get sharper and less likely to go off the rails.
Also I find that on greenfield, babysitting is a must, but once you have established your house style of patterns, abstractions, and baselines, you can let any of them roam free cause they will look for examples before going forward.
I agree with the sentiment though that if you let a swarm design and code your whole codebase, you will be lost in how it fits together. More feature bloat than code bloat though from my experience
When ChatGPT 3.5 dropped, I typed in. “Can you make me a Python script that tells me when the ISS passes over my house at <address>” and it one shotted it. I knew the world had changed forever.
I sincerely disagree that AI is worse than the crypto/NFT hype… pig butchering is one of the most disgusting practices imaginable and it was turned into a legitimate low effort vehicle for scammers due to web3 and the hype train.
AI is definitely on a scale of magnitude more but it has inherent value outside of “scarcity”. It’s actually quite the opposite with sheer supply/demand balance. Also investing in crypto made me less money than investing in myself by using AI to learn and challenge myself to think differently.
I’m confused, isn’t this rewrite still unreleased as of today? Surely people understand that a simple, “do an audit for memory safety” will bring it up to par.
100% could not agree more. Was hired to fix a vibe coded app for a company that one of their people whipped up over five months. Tens of thousands of lines of code in a single file and no security whatsoever.
The guy uses Claude Code, same as me… it’s like a highly skilled mason with a chisel, against me with a chisel. I’m not going to produce the same masterpiece, because there is SME that underpins the accelerant.
I built a community tool for exactly this, based on privacy first principals but around the what. It’s workflow based and not “put your sensitive data into ChatGPT and hope it captures the right stuff”. Mostly built for security folks but anyone can use it
I have been seeing this messaging everywhere and I have not noticed this. I have had the inverse with 4.7 over 4.6.
I think people aren’t reading the system cards when they come out. They explicitly explain your workflow needs to change. They added more levels of effort and I see no mention of that in this post.
Did y’all forget Opus 4? That was not that long ago that Claude was essentially unusable then. We are peak wizardry right now and no one is talking positively. It’s all doom and gloom around here these days.
Couldn’t agree more with this sentiment. Bootstrapping leaning AI-first means I can iterate a few arch designs and actually test it, stress it, and rip it out if needed, within a few hours.
The technical debt problem is real, but as long as after a large session across 10-12 repos over a couple days, I can do a sweep for loose ends and kill dead code that we had for an old implementation. It’s less about building a piece, and more like building version 1 of a feature and then building version 2 a week later instead of 6 months later.
Building Cabreza Command (https://cabreza.com/product). Most critical infrastructure orgs manage their OT security program across SharePoint folders, Excel trackers, and slide decks that get updated once a year. The actual state of the program lives in someone’s head.
Command replaces that with a platform that maps to their real sites, real assets, and real operational constraints, so they can actually run the program, not just document it.
Consulting firms use it to deliver more engagements with the same team. Asset owners use it to keep the program alive between engagements, or run one themselves.
I love this and it’s very clean. Only piece of feedback, put the play again button where the scores are as that is where the thumb sits on the phone to do the tapping. Mind numbingly groovy
I am not sure about the “build it yourself is expensive” argument. If you were non-technical, you probably shouldn’t try to build it yourself, but for technical folks, that’s not a stretch.
For every one person that says they mind, it adds likely an additional margin of error AND time to their day. So I really disagree with making people’s lives harder. That’s why technology exists…
And more and more of these systems are on device models, not cloud compute. So I don’t see that argument either