bulletsvshumans

"We build evals that test accuracy, saftey and performance before your users do" -- Gotta fix saftey

Hansbxgdggdhd $/$:((:):?,)?:):),()3):)::)€?~?,>~>}>~>>|>|>|>.?.|<gsggxgxggvdyxggs hutch grgsjfjdgdgdgdgegegeftedggdvdh

Differentiates grtr6g &74 g bags

I suppose it shows that it's not an outright innovation in this space, for whatever that is worth.

It's incorporated into pills that appear to be equivalent to prescribed opioids like Oxycodone. From buyer perspective it's just a cheap opioid pill.

There’s game theoretical reasons why a single actor can’t stop it in isolation. To avoid it they need to coordinate, which is more or less what they are proposing.

Get a brain morans.

3

They absolutely could calculate and put the price in the UI if they wished to. Other cloud vendors do.

Democratizing visual communication is arguably useful, for instance helping people to create diagrams that illustrate a concept they wish to convey. This is contingent on the tech working sufficiently well that the visuals are more effective at communication than the text that went into producing them though.

This is also a stylistic choice that the New Yorker magazine uses for words with double vowels where you pronounce each one separately, like coöperate, reëlect, preëminent, and naïve. So possibly intentional.

Dibs

One thing that helps with #2 ('It cannot see') -- Try playwright-cli. Your agent can use it to inspect the DOM, see what styles are applied to elements, simulate clicks, etc.

I presume U.S. Western allies

I had a prototype where the agent primarily worked autonomously, and it could solicit human feedback via tool calls. But yes that pattern does feel like it is hastening the apocalypse.

Either way, you can walk through the door after. Unless we reseal it legislatively. Resetting norms may be a lost cause at this point.

They rigged it.

Ok I bought my dumb horse on a mug, I admit it.

The constitution gives a number of examples. Here's one bullet from a list of seven:

"Provide serious uplift to those seeking to create biological, chemical, nuclear, or radiological weapons with the potential for mass casualties."

Whether it is or will be capable of this is a good question, but I don't think model trainers are out of place in having some concern about such things.

I see we have entered the "Gas Town" naming era.

Please publish to Open VSX so it is easily available for VS Code forks like Cursor as well.

I think this a good technique to be familiar with, although in a lot of situations I've achieved similar value by simply feeding the underlying JSON data objects corresponding to the intended UI state back into the coding agent. It doesn't render quite as nicely, but it is often still human-readable, and more importantly both LLM and procedurally interpretable, meaning you can fold the results back into your agentic (and/or conventional testing) development loop. It's not quite as cool, but I think a bit more practical, especially for earlier stage development.

Maybe the glut of conventional food leaves the prospect of eating their compatriots less appetizing.

Keep milking the cash cows to pay for the new growth area (AI). Convert maximum % of Windows users into subscription service consumers (e.g. cloud storage, Office 365, future paid AI capabilities.)

I think coding agents require fundamentally different development practices in order to produce efficiency improvements. And just like any new tool, they benefit from wisdom in how they are applied, which we are just starting to develop as an industry. I expect that over time we will grow to understand and also expand the circumstances in which they are a net benefit, while also appreciating where they are a hindrance, leading to an overall efficiency increase as we avoid the productivity hit resulting from their misapplication.

Hello fellow human!

Try specification-driven-development with something like speckit [0]. It helps tremendously for facilitating a process around gathering requirements, doing research, planning, breaking into tasks, and finally implementing. Much better than having a coding agent just go straight to coding.

[0] - https://github.com/github/spec-kit

I think the prompt is a major source of the issue. "We need to improve the quality of this codebase" implicitly indicates that there is something wrong with the codebase. I would be curious to see if it would reach a point of convergence with a prompt that allowed for it. Something like "Improve the quality of this codebase, or tell me that it is already in an optimal state."

But dividends also result in a concrete financial reward for all shareholders, yes?

Your link is broken. Please fix as I'm very curious to review the evidence here.

CICO is necessary but not sufficient. You also need some strategy for how to achieve CO > CI. Different strategies have vastly different implications in regards to willpower, health outcomes, suffering, time, cost, etc.