This missed the point that they are ignoring evolution is literally the way you build things. There is no other way. You don't know what is actually needed or what might work really. You try things and then compress later. If you can try bigger things, bigger leaps great.
Readit NewsI was playing about with Chat GPT the other day, uploading screen shots of sheet music and asking it to convert it to ABC notation so I could make a midi file of it.
The results seemed impressive until I noticed some of the "Thinking" statements in the UI.
One made it apparent the model / agent / whatever had read the title from the screenshot and was off searching for existing ABC transcripts of the piece Ode to Joy.
So the whole thing was far less impressive after that, it wasn't reading the score anymore, just reading the title and using the internet to answer my query.
Yes I have found that grok for example actually suddenly becomes quite sane when you tell it to stop querying the internet And just rethink the conversation data and answer the question.
It's weird, it's like many agents are now in a phase of constantly getting more information and never just thinking with what they've got.
these products are intentionally designed to be addictive by some of the greatest minds of our generation. If you were intentionally designing society this would be the opposite of what you'd do.
Our children are effectively enslaved through basic trinkets and manipulation to serve as eye-balls for ad impressions to fuel equity value in silicon valley. It's fucked and it was intentionally designed to be this fucked.
The abstract of what you state makes sense, but the layers of manipulation on top of it are what the problem is.
It's worth stating that addictive tech is addictive partly because it doesn't work very well.
So they build useful things and then make them pretty bad and less useful. If they were useful your interest or need would complete and you would move on.
Fundamentally I think it is important to say this. Addiction confounds some things in the space of designed systems
The biggest surprise to me with all this low-quality contribution spam is how little shame people apparently have. I have a handful of open source contributions. All of them are for small-ish projects and the complexity of my contributions are in the same ball-park as what I work on day-to-day. And even though I am relatively confident in my competency as a developer, these contributions are probably the most thoroughly tested and reviewed pieces of code I have ever written. I just really, really don't want to bother someone with low quality "help" who graciously offers their time to work on open source stuff.
Other people apparently don't have this feeling at all. Maybe I shouldn't have been surprised by this, but I've definitely been caught off guard by it.
I would imagine there are a lot of "small nice to haves" that people submit because they are frustrated about the mere complexity of submitting changes. Minor things that involve a lot of complexity merely in terms of changing some config or some default etc. Something where there is a significant probability of it being wrong but also a high probability of someone who knows the project being able to quickly see if it's ok or not.
i.e. imagine a change that is literally a small diff, that is easy to describe as a mere user and not a developer, and that requires quite a lot of deep understanding merely to submit as a PR (build the project! run the tests! write the template for the PR!).
Really a lot of this stuff ends up being a kind of failure mode of various projects that we all fall into at some point where "config" is in the code and what could be a simple change and test required a lot of friction.
Obviously not all submissions are going to be like this but I think I've tried a few little ones like that where I would normally just leave whatever annoyance I have alone but think "hey maybe it's 10 min faff with AI and a PR".
The structure of the project incentives kind of creates this. Increasing cost to contribution is a valid strategy of course, but from a holistic project point of view it is not always a good one especially assuming you are not dealing with adversarial contributors but only slightly incompetent ones.
nobodywillobsrv commented on I was banned from Claude for scaffolding a Claude.md file? hugodaniel.com/posts/clau... · Posted by u/hugodan
This whole API vs plan looks weird to me. Why not force everyone to use API? You pay for what you use, it's very simple. API should be the most honest way to monetize, right?
This fixed subscription plan with some hardly specified quotas looks like they want to extract extra money from these users who pay $200 and don't use that value, at the same time preventing other users from going over $200. Like I understand that it might work at scale, but just feels a bit not fair to everyone?
The fixed fee plan is because the agent and the tools have internal choices/planning about cost. If you simply pay for API the only feedback to them that they are being too costly is for you to stop.
If you look at tool calls like MCP and what not you can see it gets ridiculous. Even though it's small for example calling pal MCP from the prompt is still burning tokens afaik. This is "nobody's" fault in this case really but you can see how the incentives are and we all need to think how to make this entire space more usable.
nobodywillobsrv commented on Anthropic disabled my account after payment cancer patient/medical data trapped · Posted by u/marichala
Anthropic should do a full inquiry into this and fire people for it. No questions asked. Fire them. And then reply with automated bits.
nobodywillobsrv commented on Install.md: A standard for LLM-executable installation mintlify.com/blog/install... · Posted by u/npmipg
IMO it's completely the other way around.
Shell scripts can be audited. The average user may not do it due to laziness and/or ignorance, but it is perfectly doable.
On the other hand, how do you make sure your LLM, a non-deterministic black box, will not misinterpret the instructions in some freak accident?
How about both worlds?
Instead of asking the agent to execute it for you, you ask the agent to write an install.sh based on the install.md?
Then you can both audit whatever you want before running or not.
nobodywillobsrv commented on Ask HN: How can we solve the loneliness epidemic? · Posted by u/publicdebates
AI (chat) companies now have enough data to recommend h2h (human to human) but they are not building this.
They could literally find people who are working on he same things and recommend them for networking etc.
But that would take you off platform. Off attention.
Who wants to build this. Others must be thinking the same thing?
nobodywillobsrv commented on Scott Adams has died youtube.com/watch?v=Rs_Jr... · Posted by u/ekianjo
I don't get "avoiding the ugliness" when someone dies. We need to acknowledge the ugliness and try to do better.
Acting like "oh, he was trolling", or "it was just a small amount of hating Black people and women" is exactly how you get Steven Miller in the fucking White House.
We need to make it shameful to be bigoted again, and that means calling out the bigotry even in death.
What exactly was the bad stuff? He was insensitive about empirical reality or he was literally wrong about something in the sense of being very confident about something despite having little data? Or something else? I only remember the cartons really but was aware some people seemed to be irked about him recently.
We are seeing parallel mechanics from the Trump/GOP camp: look at the library purges in conservative states and the push to co-opt moderation on platforms like TikTok. Access to the historical record isn't just a detail; it is the fundamental substrate of free speech.