ramraj07

Would you trust clean repos that are messed up by AI?

I was reading your comment, agreeing with it but still feeling why this is a bad comment. It just occurred to me that an anecdotal statement like this is the antithesis of scientific discourse. We have a paper here, trying to answer a question, and anecdotal testimonials can only harm the discussion by biasing readers without adding anything of value to let anyone objectively conclude anything on the problem.

The most useful discussion would be if we all read the paper and critique its methodology or results.

There was never a time when a book gave the public an overview of the universe. ABHOT was so popular for being a book no one actually read, theres even an index named after Hawking due to it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_Index

Did _you_ read that book?

There however definitely was a piece of media that captured public minds and educated them about the cosmos. And that was the show Cosmos. The original of course. Not the NDT drivel.

If your car salesman friend gives you stupid advice it either means he is stupid or he is not your friend.

Thats just a coding agent the "peopple" use via you, with extra steps.

You may have been lucky or privileged in working in high competency environments where the essence of containerization is truly captured in the dev practices. The vast majority of mediocre eng shops do "dockerize everything" but would still end up with leaks everywhere, artifacts in s3, endpoint dependencies, mounts that depend on the helm chart etc.

IMO containerization as a principle has failed the test of making mediocre teams productive. Such teams cargo cult ape on this term and think because they've done it theyre now webscale.

I personally like to still start with "this code should run anywhere" principle. On python especially with uv now this seems like a safer bet. At the least this forces the engineers to explicitly list out stupid dependencies in the reader.

The important point is that your benchmark is pretty much irrelevant for the actual usage. Thus whatever conclusion you draw is not just irrelevant but misleading.

This particular article has the tell tale opus 4.8 smell of these short sentences. I think its mainly opus 4.8

Thats not absurd. Do you know what software engineers make? Do you know what a Starbucks coffee costs? 50 bucks is nothing for someone in that life.

Be careful with these apps. The permissions they ask for are quite expansive.

We use the bugbot. Best code review agent we've seen.

Im just curious how this is going to play out.. Will anthropic just stop releasing its stuff on bedrock now? Will they try to start moving their operations out of the US? If so, to where?

I know everyones excited about Football and the Knicks, but this is far more exciting and interesting than any sport could be.

Devils advocate, I also vehemently shat on RNAi therapeutics a decade back. We do have RNAi therapies in market now though. I do think Crispr will find its place similarly.

I regularly hit usage limits on CC but thats when im in the zone, and do 5 things in parallel. Thats like 5 hours a week.

I also hit limits if I do something important, at which point I make it do a loop with significant subagent counts to just review and adjust the code extensively using a bunch of frameworks. Im perfectly happy with the CC limits of a max plan, it is never something that blocks me.and when it runs out im brain fried as well anyway so thats not an issue.

Competing with "x is all you need"

Such an elegant finding. I only wish they did slightly more to validate the result further. Depleting all macrophages is a fairly drastic step. Heck, you dont even know what other tissue this affected. Theres no correlation that only liver macrophages or their iron or neuronal connections were the responsible system for the disruption observed.

Thats not a bubble though, thats just Stockholm syndrome or genuine acceptance of this behavior as being acceptable or even perfect.

They never advertised that they did. Its not even real true AI. They just struggle with new scenarios.

People drive into floods too. They just don't get sensational articles written about it, just posted on reddit.

I really wouldn't care.

What's wrong with the Polish author example?

You mean like Teslas multi terabyte repo is not normal?

The first step I do when I do any meaningful side project is to set up rds with snapshots. So any startup that doesnt do this one basic step already deserves to fail in my opinion.

Then next I've used AI agents like crazy, we even have linked mcp servers that let it query on the dev database. Haven't seen it try deleting everything a single time. I haven't seen any agent try to do anything destructive. Ever. Perhaps its just reflecting an outrageously bad engineer and nothing else.

The comparison is not valid. When writing let's say a novel, you cant just tell some random dude "write chapter 4" - you cant outsource it to a human so it only makes neither can you outsource it to ai.

Software engineering is not that. You absolutely can and often will hand ofoff work to humans. Its not inherently that creative in the actual coding part.

I would argue unconscious in the anesthesia sense is not the same as "not having consciousness" at a categorical level.

There is no true scientific discussion possible about the nature of consciousness. This is squarely in the realm of philosophy.

I personally think its moot to discuss whether LLMs are conscious. If they are, then we have diluted the definition to something that has no relevance to morality or concepts like life and death. Lets just take them for what they are, if we feel like they deserve to be treated with respect then we should (dont think anyone does yet).

For 1, the general thinking is that companies like these perform the job of abstracting the CLI complexity in their application while the harness presented to the llm can be independently as suave as needed for it.

No matter how smart you think you get, I personally dont trust the models in an environment where they can read the secrets one way or another, in any high volume production environment.

It assumes the existence of a sandbox that is by definition ephemeral or "cattle-like". Why?

Because the moment you use k8s, you have to assume that, apparently. Or so Im told by all the infrastructure people I speak with. Getting these pods to not disappear just because one process ran out of memory has been an herculean task.

I wish our standard deploy processes produce durable computers that dont break our bank but that hasn't been an easy requirement with simple infra teams.

Not even close to the same thing though.

Backing up multi terabyte production postgres databases is not merely cos playing ha ha