HN user

pelario

1,057 karma
Posts13
Comments172
View on HN

This should be the first comment. I wrote some criticism, mostly because many internal contradictions in the article. Then, I notice the structure...

"The accountability gap" Here’s the question nobody’s asking: when it goes wrong, who carries the bag? (..)

"What to do instead"

"The craft still matters"

It hasn’t thought about the problem at all. It’s pattern-matching against its training data and producing the most plausible-sounding response.

The article kind of lost me here. Agents are way more than that, today. And the author knows it, as later it says stuff like

Claude will never do this. It’s trained to be helpful.

But the first phrase just tell me author just have a deep dislike for agents and it's looking for rationalizations for that feeling.

Part of the criticism is on point, sure. But if it "being trained to be helpful" is a problem, it's fixable. It can "be trained to be more critical".

Later:

But it wasn’t designed for your team. (..) It was designed for the median of everything Claude has seen. A generic best practice for a generic problem at a generic company. Which is to say, it was designed for nobody.

That's non-sense. Anybody who understand algorithms know that, sure, on a first instance you have a "good algorithm" that has a good performance on average, or in worst-case. But then, you can design algorithms that are adaptive to the input. Same applies here.

From the article:

"As temperature approaches zero from the negative side, the model output will again be deterministic — but this time, the least likely tokens will be output."

I understand this as, a negative number far from zero is also quite random (just with a distribution that will produce unlikely tokens).

Personally, I hate it; I don't like magic or black boxes.

So, no compilers for you neither ?

(To be fair: I'm not loving the whole vibe coding thing. But I'm trying to approach this wave with open mind, and looking for the good arguments in both side. This is not one of them)

That's simply not true.

There are plenty of smart devices (including lighbulbs, sensor movements, and what not)t hat use bluetooh, or protocols like Zigbee that enable all kind of functionality without wifi password.

The most emblematic application in real life is in bioinformatics. BWA and Bowtie are two widely used softwares built upon them.

Power it off

This has been the real game changer for me. As instant gratification is not so instant, I can go way larger stretches of time without checking the phone. Also, as nowadays most people message, and calls are not so common (at least in my circles), there is no "harm".

Generation Junk 3 years ago

Are you saying that none of their original appliances have died?

If not, do you realize that you claiming " If it was survivorship bias some of these appliances would've died." When "these" refers exclusively to those who haven't died is the very definition of survivorship bias?

Metric Time 3 years ago

Except 13×28 = 364, so you get the "free day" every year, and two of them on leap ones

From the link:

"I'm sharing this work because I hope to start a conversation about what could be possible within C++’s own evolution to rejuvenate C++, now that we have C++20 and soon C++23 to build upon."

Clearly this is relevant for c++ itself (coming from Sutter), so I'd say it's quite unfair/misguided to call it "just a distraction from more relevant efforts."

The Finnish political system was infiltrated by Russian assets (willing or just useful fools) for decades [0]

I just read the whole [0] reference, and I could not find anything related to your claim. Can you give specific examples ? Or can you explain how the article supports your claim ?