noosphr
noosphr on Hacker News
I'm doing that now with gemini argon.
It's better than the ductape and glue pipelines that we had previous to this.
The software is the definition of plumbing no one cares about and testing it is trivial.
It doesn't mention formal methods once.
They found a more efficient way to play Whac-A-Mole with bugs, they didn't find a way to reduce bugs.
Data is an embodied finite being. Claude et al seem more like the Borg or Skynet.
I imagine it has been, but they didn't release it because the diff is too big to be accepted into regular Python and it would cost more to fix it than use it as is.
With the current sota models code is free.
You set the agents against themselves and burn tokens like there's no tomorrow.
The feeling of coding like that is a bit like realizing that an elevator is 10cm of aluminum and a 100 meters of empty space under your feet.
After the first few bouts of existential dread you get uses to it.
I believe that the current generation of AI models have matched the hype of the last few years after the previous generation did not.
Whether they will keep doing so is another matter entirely.
The train will keep going for another 6 months at least.
You can easily read posts before 1994, what you're saying definitely did not happen.
At the start moderators worked with you, after 2014 they worked against you.
They still do, it's just that the first 95% of carving things out of rock is literally getting the rock into the shape needed to start doing actual scuplting.
I'm short, it's artistic boilerate with no meaningful value to either the artist or the viewer.
There is more code than ever. The amount of software seems to be shrinking.
The second iPhone was the 3g the third was the 3gs.
Trying to review slop code by eye is as productive as using pencil and paper to check address arithmetic in assembly from a compiler.
The fake main points can be excused since the underlying models are auto regressive and that's as good as you can do with a regular language.
LLMs text generation is much closer to the way humans speak than to the way good writers write.
AI generated text has no human centered underlying model of physical reality and its metaphors are tortured as a result.
If we had talking centipedes the results would probably be similar, but for different reasons.
>I'm sitting here watching astra do in a day what would have taken me at least 3-6 months.
I've got some bad news for you.
>multiplying development speed by 10x or more
[[citation needed]]
I use the api from the model provider?
I've had a hell of a time with more complex model setups in open router and have gone to just using the underlying APIs directly.
>Copyright is dead.
I remember hearing that in 1996 too.
Copyright adaptation literally means billion dollar lawsuits, because copyright only adapts after court decisions.
The BSD licences are not copyleft, or indeed part of the GNU copyright regime.
If you don't break the law you do indeed fall further behind people who do.
Nothing in that post is against using an LLM. It's all about copyright:
>Since every file in OpenBSD has been continually verified to ensure
correct Copyright, and we've even deleted code which has incorrect
Copyright, the chances of us accepting such new code with such a suspicious
Copyright situation is zero.
Once the current bubble pops we're going to see a lot of litigation over copyright enfringement by LLMs. Currently no one wants to rock the boat because everyone hopes to make a trillion dollars from AI, Oracle included. Once they see they can't the knives are going to come out and I wouldn't want to be Linux at that point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_LLC_v._Oracle_America
If you're writing Japanese poetry instead of solving maths problems expect to get paid Japanese poetry wages.
Homework is not usually something you get paid to do.
>Why should we be estatic that some signifigant math problem was solved by machine rather of a human being in a language only the machine understands?
Why should I be ecstatic that someone solved a problem using Hilbert Calculus when I can only understand Sequent Calculus? [0]
[0] This is a joke. No 'real' mathematicians do systematic proofs. What gets posted in math journals is the equivalent of architecture diagrams.
That isn't freedom or speech, that is the first amendment.
And we replace one tyrant for dozens. It's not much of an improvement.
Because for the last 10 years anyone who was pro free speech was called a fascist in the US.