Readit NewsMinor nitpick, but the README for your ui-component project under ee says:
"License This project is part of Morphik and is licensed under the MIT License."
However, your ee folder has an "enterprise" license, not the MIT license.
I use it in Claude Desktop for the right use case, it's much better than thinking mode.
But, I admit, I haven't tried it in Cursor or with other LLMs yet.
- File manipulation - Directory manipulation - tree-sitter integration
and more.
I also installed Tavily Search, sequential thinking, and Playwright.
I still use Cursor for development, and I use Claude Desktop for higher-level documentation, testing, etc.
For example, I'll check out a new repo that is lacking in documentation. I'll get the app running, then explain to Claude where the code lives, how to access the real app, and how I want the features documented.
Then Claude will happily scan the codebase, take screenshots of the running app, etc., all by himself, and then create a report (through the artifact system) with visualizations, graphs, etc.
If you don't mind taking a few minutes, what are the main reasons to use Kuzu instead?
I apologize, but the URL and page description you provided appear to be fictional. There is no current announcement of a Claude 3.7 Sonnet model on Anthropic's website. The most recent Claude 3 models are Claude 3 Haiku, Sonnet, and Opus, released in March 2024. I cannot generate a description for a non-existent product announcement.
I appreciate their stance on safety, but that still made me laugh.
1. First, I have classic essays that I wrote by hand. I'll ask an LLM for thematic flow or grammar checking, but it's my thoughts. It's more sporatic, but they're things I'm compelled to talk about and think deeply about. Example is on how visual programming is stuck on nodes-and-wires. https://interjectedfuture.com/visual-programming-is-stuck-on...
2. Next, I have posts that I write on a schedule. These are what I call lab notes, which I'll post every monday no matter what. These are easy to write because I just recount what I've been doing the past week and what challenges and wins there are. This exercises the muscle of posting something. Example is this past week on type checking https://interjectedfuture.com/lab-note-60-writing-words-and-...
3. I do write TILs, though these don't occur for me nearly as much at the moment, due to the type of work I'm doing. It's like my own stackoverflow, I guess. Example is on the common footgun of useEffect. https://interjectedfuture.com/today-i-learned/til-message-ha...
4. Lastly, I have posts where I had conversations with LLMs in depth on a niche topic that I think others would find interesting. If it's a back and forth, at the end of the conversation, I'll have it write a blog post based on what I thought the salient points were. If it's deep research, I'll just post that. I mark it clearly at the top it was LLM generated. The generation can be good enough that it's worth the post for humans to read. But also, in the hopes that the next model might pick it up, as an indication of what's good an interesting. It's basically one single sample eval based on my taste of what's good. Example is how algebraic effects are handled across Koka, Eff, OCaml, and Unison: https://interjectedfuture.com/algebraic-handler-lookup-in-ko...
All's to say to people, there's different modalities of blogging. If you pick just one, you might feel pressure to write when you have nothing to write. But if you don't write you don't get in the habit, which is why I do the lab notes. It makes me post even if I don't have anything to say, or the time to say it.
- Radar: just cool categorized articles, libraries, apps, etc. that I found during the week and organized in weekly drops.
- Guides: In my mind, those were closer to TIL than real guides, though I couldn't figure out how to name them. I love TIL for that.
- Playground: Forcing myself to share prototypes, snippets, etc.
I also have tons of LLM chats that could become content. Instead of trying to rewrite them, I will just share them as they are (while being transparent).
The main idea, as you said, is to find a modality that works well for me and force myself to write more.
https://x.com/thdxr/status/1933561254481666466https://x.com/meowgorithm/status/1933593074820891062https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCJBbVJ_wP0
Gemini summary of the above:
- Kujtim Hoxha creates a project named TermAI using open-source libraries from the company Charm.
- Two other developers, Dax (a well-known internet personality and developer) and Adam (a developer and co-founder of Chef, known for his work on open-source and developer tools), join the project.
- They rebrand it to OpenCode, with Dax buying the domain and both heavily promoting it and improving the UI/UX.
- The project rapidly gains popularity and GitHub stars, largely due to Dax and Adam's influence and contributions.
- Charm, the company behind the original libraries, offers Kujtim a full-time role to continue working on the project, effectively acqui-hiring him.
- Kujtim accepts the offer. As the original owner of the GitHub repository, he moves the project and its stars to Charm's organization. Dax and Adam object, not wanting the community project to be owned by a VC-backed company.
- Allegations surface that Charm rewrote git history to remove Dax's commits, banned Adam from the repo, and deleted comments that were critical of the move.
- Dax and Adam, who own the opencode.ai domain and claim ownership of the brand they created, fork the original repo and launch their own version under the OpenCode name.
- For a time, two competing projects named OpenCode exist, causing significant community confusion.
- Following the public backlash, Charm eventually renames its version to Crush, ceding the OpenCode name to the project now maintained by Dax and Adam.