flyingcircus3

451 カルマ登録 8 年前

コメント

6 日前議論

Watching him walk out with UFC fighter Alexander Volkanovski as if he were part of his corner, and seeing him continuously, but incorrectly, anticipate that the rest of the men he was with were about to hand him something, or otherwise interact with him in any way, was honestly a mouth wide open moment for me. Not that the other guys ignored him, but that he clearly expected them all to include him at this moment that months of their preparation have lead up to, contrasted with him buying his way in to. It was one of those moments that makes you feel better about your own social awkwardness in comparison.

9 日前議論

I think you're ascribing too much thought and reason to the people that use that phrase. If anything, its a signal to their ingroup that they are keeping the faith, and proving that they are sufficiently devoted.

9 日前議論

The person youre replying to also employed the term TDS in recent comments, which I believe refers to Trump Devotion Syndrome.

Muddying waters and making debate impossible are his goals. He hoped to antagonize everyone with his trigger word.

22 日前議論

Actually, its just one of the 170k English words we all totally already knew this morning.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48598586

25 日前議論

There is most certainly still prompt engineering involved. How there can be both the responsivity to different cues like "plan this", "write this", "analyze this", "defend this", "poke holes in this", but not responsivity to the various terminology you provide in your explanations of "this", where to get information about specs/standards/requirements, what details I care about, and therefore can't compromise on, vs what details I'm willing to accept whatever the top reddit post from 4 years ago recommends.

I don't see how these systems can have the ability to be effectively expressive about all of the minutia, and not have all of the various different possible expressions lead to vastly different outcomes.

28 日前議論

But what about compositions of your reusable blocks an order of magnitude larger than you were ordinarily willing to manually compose? A lot of this misnaming Im circling around comes down to demanding that the ai user must be giving up their agency. Whatever you can name as a good practice you don't think an AI agent is a capable of employing on its own, I can retort that a human can demand the agent employ it, along with all of its other capabilities that outstrip the human typist.

28 日前議論

This is still an incomplete model, in my opinion. You're still holding up what is possible as a non ai assisted developer as equal to the assisted one in the abstract, before adding in real world things like tedium, boredom, distraction, the ephemeral nature of novelty, frustration, and everything else that has derailed human software development, but inference engines are perfectly impervious to.

I can give you a concrete example: this week at work, it occurred to me that the 16 channels of expected and measured binary on or off test data I need to collect could benefit from a visualization because matching expectations will have visual properties that failures will not. So I had my AI agent create a script that encodes 16 channels of expected and measured binary wave forms over time, as a 32 channel 1Hz sampling frequency wav file, which I can view with audacity, which also has the necessary controls to measure time between transitions in the waveformms.

From hindsight, one could argue that since all of that solution consisted of rudiments of perfectly normal software that didnt need AI to be written or integrated, it was equally possible to create without AI. But knowing that could do it with the greatest of ease, for the total price of naming it, converted this from a project that required the motivation to figure out all of the necessary steps to one that just needed a good description.

28 日前議論

For months, I've been thinking of how to express or name this idea that people misname the way other people use coding agents and make bad assumptions about what sorts of tasks they could be used for, seemingly all in the service of demonstrating how derivative the end results must be. So thank you for whatever you've done to help dislodge the blocker for me.

I think there is a model in a lot of people's minds that AI coding is exclusively handing off the thought processes and ideation processes to the agent, which seems to foreclose on the possibility that it offers the least friction of any other available method to translate the users thoughts into useful artifacts, some of which are the working software that is the primary goal of development. The model says something like "I don't know what it needs to consist of, but make me this thing I'll know when I see.". But there are also plenty of people who have spent the time learning these skills before AI came along, and remain capable of performing those feats without the ai, but realize they are even more capable to do those same things with AI, in volumes that would have been previously prohibitively tedious. And now that they have the tedium wrangled, they are freed from all of these arguments that start: we can't do that because it would take forever.

先月議論

It isn't reasonable to infer that OP was claiming to have universally been unimpressed about every facet of Fable, and now some unrelated impressiveness is the evidence of their false claims.

2 か月前議論

According to Google, this claim is sourced to a person rather famous for baseless claims, from the founding of companies he owns, to the capabilities of his products, to cash prizes for registering to vote, to when he will send humans to mars.

Continuing to accept this person as a credible source of information isnt a reasonable thing to do.

2 か月前議論

Yes you do. He came away with that conclusion because he entered with that conclusion. When you're already radicalized to a specific outcome, you lose the ability to perform the process of elimination.

2 か月前議論

This is because the community around Gamestop is radicalized by the exact same grievance culture behind the MAGA movement. It even started conveniently in January of 2021, at a point of MAGA's seeming obsolescence. The adherents of this movement have already accepted the final result as guaranteed, and literally every piece of news the world over gets interpreted through the lens of this eventuality that Gamestock's stock price will explode, making them all millionaires and billionaires. Just like MAGA, the community is full of people whose main role is to delegitimize negative news, and reframe it all as instead proof that the mother of all short squeezes is imminent. Today is the perfect day to see this playing out on their subreddits.

2 か月前議論

I don't believe in the theory, I'm stating that I understand the theory to largely revolve around powerful players manipulating markets, such as robinhood to disallow buying GameStop in January 21. In my view, GameStop enjoyers are so thoroughly radicalized and primed to expect another short squeeze, that the content of any given days news, related to GameStop or not, is regularly deciphered as clear sign that of its arrival. A large part of that certainty has seems to stem from the fact that canonically guilty people like Griffin, remaining free, an ever present festering reminder of their grievance.

2 か月前議論

There is too much overlap with the tropes found in communities who want to believe in aliens and interdimensional beings to take the Gamestop saga seriously. So many appeals to emotion and ignorance, and the investment in a particular outcome has made the reddit groups around this topic indistinguishable from people who are ride or die Trumpers impervious to the falsification of their bad ideas. There is no longer a rubric of reasonable evaluation of new relevant information. The festering wound of people like Ken Griffin effortlessly getting away with their crimes has gone on for so long that has radicalized people to interpret every new piece of info through the lens of being the first crumplings of an eventual avalanche of retribution that has been promised to them.

3 か月前議論

I take from GP that they try to make their branches small, and keep the cycle of development->review->merging small, so that the problem stacked PRs seeks to solve doesn't materialize in the first place.

Stacked PRs in my experience has primarily been a request to merge in a particular order. If you're the only merger, as in GP's case, there's no need to request this of yourself.

3 か月前議論

Stacking branches for any extended period of time is definitely a poor mixing of the concepts of branches and commits. If you have a set of changes you need to keep in order, but you also need to maintain multiple silos where you can cleanly allow the code to diverge, that divergence constitutes the failure of your efforts to keep the changes in order.

Until you can make it effortless, maintaining a substantial commit structure and constantly rebasing to add changes to the proper commit quickly turns into more effort than just waiting to the end and manually editing a monster diff into multiple sensible commits. But we take the challenge and tell ourselves we can do better if we're proactive.

3 か月前議論

I think you're conflating lossy encoding degrading fidelity with the main problem that plagues most audience recordings: the crowd is in the foreground and the band is in the background. One is nearly imperceptible to most people that haven't spent decades in studios like Neil Young, and the other is immediately obvious to everyone.

3 か月前議論

It does seem like a lot of people have extrapolated the second half of the 20th century to be the baseline expectation from here on out.

3 か月前議論

Ive found lately that a few sites, including WSJ, archive.ph just hangs on the loading screen. The existence of your link should make it skip the loading, as in understand it. Is there a trick to this?

4 か月前議論

Why would you settle for a guide when you can get a claude skill to do it for you?

https://github.com/nidhinjs/prompt-master