Readit Newsskytrue commented on Show HN: We tried to make Azure easier for developers appspaces.dev/... · Posted by u/skytrue
Hey people,
We launched a preview of App Spaces (v2) today which is our attempt to make the Microsoft Azure portal much friendlier for developers who are new to Azure or new to cloud, and don't want to deal with all the cruft and intense complexity that Azure/AWS/GCP/etc provide. We know that there's so much more we can do to make these experiences better and this is our beginnings of getting there via something like App Spaces.
You can check out our site at https://www.appspaces.dev, or go directly to the experience (https://ms.portal.azure.com/#view/Microsoft_Azure_PaasServer...).
If you want to learn more or provide feedback, you can reach out to me-- sk dot hartle at microsoft dotcom. We want to rapidly iterate on our initial design here and get to core value within the next half a year or so. We know we have a long way to go, which is why we're releasing it to the community to help us drive and shape our roadmap.
> But almost at that same moment, Netflix has listed a $900,000 job opening for an AI guru. That doesn’t feel like a balanced approach to me.
They listed a $900k position for someone who does machine learning platform planning. Every single recommendation you see on Netflix is powered by machine learning and has for a long long time. It is the core of their business and impacts every single user interaction with the product. And as the linked article itself notes the job isn't about content generation. Tying this into the AI hype is really disingenuous.
edit: And looking at level.fyi Netflix was paying the same last year for ML talent.
Thanks for pointing that out. It’s been driving me crazy that there’s all these sensationalist articles using that as the “smoking gun”, implying that Netflix specifically wants an AI product manager to produce television shows.
As somebody who has worked to create an AI-generated show, and who is also a PM at a big tech company that is using LLMs for non-creative purposes, I can tell you that the “PM” work I do with these LLMs is vastly different than the creative work I do with them. It’s an entirely different frame and discipline.
I’d start to be concerned once we see job listings that explicitly look for creators, with technical backgrounds in generative AI. The creator/creative talent part comes first before everything else.
The only thing I still use ChatGPT semi-frequently is to translate stuff, mainly from Japanese to my native language or English.
And I'm surprised how often it failed to follow the basic instruction of
Please translate the following paragraph to X-language.
(Paragraph in Japanese.)
Any clue how to make it better? I use 3.5 FWIW.
This doesn’t help you probably, but the difference between 3.5 and 4 when giving it instructions to follow is huge. I encourage everybody to use GPT-4 when possible, the differences are night and day.
Interesting, so you are saying you have an easier time generating JSON using the single prompt models like text-davinci and text-bison, rather than the chat versions?
Sorry, I was non-specific. If you're using ChatGPT, you're basically using a "product" that OpenAI created. It has specific system prompts and prompt engineering to ensure that it stays on the rails. If you, instead, use the OpenAI API's for GPT-3.5/GPT-4, you aren't beholden to the ChatGPT "product". It's very easy to create a chatbot (not using ChatGPT, the product) that only produces JSON. It's just hard to get ChatGPT to do that same activity.
That's why everybody doing experiments in this space should either 1) be using the OpenAI Playground, or 2) using the API, and not using ChatGPT.
What I find astonishing is the wall of text he wrote to get a simple json with 2 key/value pairs. It almost defeats the point of using LLMs as productivity hack.
This isn’t reality. Using ChatGPT this way is fruitless, because there is a system prompt you’re fighting against. I can write a one sentence system prompt for the GPT API that specifies GPT to only spit out JSON, and it works fine. It’s a pretty funny series of image, though.
skytrue commented on Meetings *are* the work medium.com/@ElizAyer/meet... · Posted by u/adrianhoward
I’ve been a part of many organizations where the meetings are bad. I don’t think it’s that meetings are inherently bad, but rather how different companies and teams use them.
I generally only invite people to meetings who I know will have important input or need the context. The meeting should be about determining next steps for N period and provide clarity and direction to take those steps.
Any other meeting I mostly find to be a waste of time. But when you get the right people in the room, once a week, to talk about progress on a new product (for example), it can almost entirely replace documentation and is far more flexible and lightweight.
I love writing a good narrative doc or spec, but it leaves room for interpretation. Other people are also not as skilled at writing, and it leaves them without a vehicle to communicate what they want.
So, yeah, agree that meetings are the work/can be an optimal tool for achieving work, but they need to be done right.
The concept of 10 Minutes A Day is extensible beyond just HackerNews, but the Hacker News dataset was a great place to start as it is often a go-to for news around technology and new projects.
It was built on top of Flask, React, OpenAI GPT-4o-mini (to drive down costs), and generally uses a few different prompting techniques to make things work as intended, because GPT-4o-mini can be frustrating to instruct.
10MAD is going to be extended across different news verticals in the future (once I have the time).