Is finding the right stocks to invest in an LLM problem? Language models aren't the right fit, I would presume. It would also be insightful to compare this with traditional ML models.
> Regardless of which model you're using, you may notice that Claude frequently ignores your CLAUDE.md file's contents.
This is a news for me. And at the same time it isn’t. Without the knowledge of how the models actually work, most of the prompting is guesstimate at best. You have no control over models via prompts.
It's really frustrating to see every innovation eventually crammed into advertisements. The brightest minds spend most of their energy figuring out effective ways of serving ads.
You are right. I dug through the document some more. The setup, as mentioned for protected branches [1], should ideally work without much overhead. It does suggest merging back to main, but the FAQ also mentions that the frequency can be decided individually.
I was always afraid to switch from Gmail, knowing the impact it would have. But I switched to Fastmail this year and my experience has been comparatively frictionless. My fear was unfounded.
With so many settings spread across multiple sections, especially in Workspace accounts, it's challenging to keep track of how existing settings are affected by each new addition. I generally review these regularly, yet find surprises now and then.
Knowing what setting does what in Gmail is becoming difficult by the day.
The way I understand this, when the agent runs `bd onboard` at startup, it gets the instructions from beads, which might refer to data files in the beads directory. Keeping them in sync via a separate branch would be an unnecessary overhead. Right?
The way I read it is beads steers agents to make use of the .beads/ folder to stay in sync across machines. So, my understanding is a dedicated branch for beads data will break the system.
Thanks! It is the structure that matters here, then. Just like you, I ask my agents to keep updating a markdown file locally and use it as a reference during working sessions. This mechanism has worked well for me.
I even occasionally ask agents to move some learnings back to my Claude.md or Agents.md file.
I'm curious whether complicating this behaviour with a database integration would further abstract the work in progress. Are we heading down a slippery slope?
I went through the whole readme first and kept wondering what problem the system aims to address. I understood that it is a distributed issue tracker. But how can that lead to a memory upgrade? It also hints at replacing markdown for plans.
So is the issue the format or lack of structure which a local database can bring in?
A much-needed project. Making yourself invisible to such privacy-invasive devices will be the need of the day. Of the two approaches you mentioned, blocking/jamming the specific wireless traffic would be pretty interesting, if possible.
I am curious to better understand the benchmarks against simple SQLite, especially under typical load. Any level of latency will be an unnecessary overhead.
I would be hesitant to generalise that. There is an inherent tension with its impact on the larger availability of your system. We can't analyse the effect in isolation.
Agreed. Setting up structures for people to provide regular feedback is a must -- I believe this goes without saying. The only downside is that this cannot be done 1:1 with each person. Hence, enabling even the motivated few is a good trade-off. But sure, necessary but not sufficient.
At the same time, accepting and acting on feedback is a skill in its own right.
Eventual consistency arises from necessity -- a need to prioritise AP more. Not every application needs strong consistency as a primary constraint. Why would you optimise for that, at the cost of availability, when eventual consistency is an acceptable default?
Though I agree with the larger point, there is a critical way to overcome that. The second line of leadership must own the culture at their team's level. This only works if you have direct access to the larger group. An open-door policy where anyone can schedule time with you is essential.
You might not understand their struggle, but you can hear and route it to the right people. Sometimes the best way to show empathy is simply to listen.