WalterSear

6 ms·

1.
by WalterSear 8mo ago
Anthropic has stated that their inference process is cash positive. It would be very surprising if this wasn't the case for everyone. It's certainly an open question whether the providers can recoup the investments being made with
2.
by WalterSear 10mo ago
Does your significant other know about your car collection? You may have a car hoarding problem.
3.
by WalterSear 10mo ago
You would have to make sure your search footprint supported that. IE - fully private, non-publicly-visible profiles everywhere.
4.
by WalterSear 10mo ago
Inference is cash positive: it's research that takes up all the money. So, if you can get ahold of enough users, the volume eventually works in your favour.
5.
by WalterSear 10mo ago
> starting to be demonstrably harmful Starting?
6.
by WalterSear 10mo ago
This isn't that. This is VCs FOMOing as global-economy-threatening levels of leverage are being bet on an AI transformation that, by even the most optimistic estimates, cannot achieve a tiny portion of the required ROI in the required
7.
by WalterSear 10mo ago
What it's transformational but takes a decade or so, instead of a year or so? It's not like this isn't following exactly the same hype cycle as every other technological transformation.
8.
by WalterSear 10mo ago
VC isn't "getting back to it's roots", though it is certainly displaying one of it's fundamental drives: FOMO.
9.
by WalterSear 10mo ago
That too, is easier than ever. It's just work, there's no secrets to it.
10.
by WalterSear 10mo ago
IMHO, there's never been a better time to build your own product and learn to sell it. The effort that AI implementation requires is clearly exponential to complexity of the organization. You can build faster now that you ever have: I
11.
by WalterSear 11mo ago
That was my first assumption, quite a while ago now.
12.
by WalterSear 11mo ago
I've claimed neither. I actually prefer restarting or rolling back quickly rather than trying to re-work suboptimal outputs - less chance of being rabbit holed. Just add what I've learned to the original ticket/prompt. '
13.
by WalterSear 11mo ago
And I'm arguing that if the output wasn't sufficient, neither was your input. You could also be asking for too much in one go, though that's becoming less and less of a problem as LLMs improve.
14.
by WalterSear 11mo ago
I think maybe there's another step too - breaking the design up into small enough peices that the LLM can follow it, and you can understand the output.
15.
by WalterSear 11mo ago
My point is that, if I can do it right, others can too. If someone's LLM is outputing slop, they are obviously doing something different: I'm using the same LLMs. All the LLM hate here isn't observation, it's sour grapes
16.
by WalterSear 11mo ago
9000-line PRs were never a good idea, have only been sufficiently plausible because we were forced to accept bad PR review practices. Coding was expensive and management beat us into LGTMing them into the codebase to keep the features churn
17.
by WalterSear 11mo ago
If you are getting garbage out, you are asking it for too much at once. Don't ask for solutions - ask for implementations.
18.
by WalterSear 11mo ago
And if you are doing something fabulously unique, the LLM can still write all the code around it, likely help with many of the components, give you at least a first pass at tests, and enable rapid, meaningful refactors after each feature
19.
by WalterSear 11mo ago
Our intelligence, yes. But that doesn't establish it as essential for thought.
20.
by WalterSear 11mo ago
They do, for many people. Perhaps you need to change your approach.
21.
by WalterSear 11mo ago
It's still a SAAS, with components that couldn't be replicated client-side, such as AI.
22.
by WalterSear 11mo ago
I have pretty much the same amount of confidence when I receive AI generated or non-AI generated code to review: my confidence is based on the person guiding the LLM, and their ability to that. Much more so than before, I'll comfortabl
23.
by WalterSear 11mo ago
I contend that, by far and away the biggest difference between entirely human-generated slop and AI-assisted stupidity is the irrational reaction that some people have to AI-assisted stuff.
24.
by WalterSear 11mo ago
Apparently, coffee contains compounds other than caffiene, that cause gastric acid secretion: tryptamides and catechols. “Espresso and French press both tend to extract higher concentrations of tryptamides,” Sebastian says. “Meanwhile, tryp
25.
by WalterSear 11mo ago
Acidity hitting the stomach?
26.
by WalterSear 11mo ago
There's been more than one way to reliably differentiate CFS patients from controls announced this year. However, there's no clinical diagnostic yet.
27.
by WalterSear 11mo ago
Claude from Nantucket
28.
by WalterSear 11mo ago
IMHO, it will be autonomous robotics - one way or another.
29.
by WalterSear 11mo ago
Anthropic said their inference is cash positive. I would be very surprised if this isn't the norm.
30.
by WalterSear 1y ago
By definition, if you don't like to experience it; don't like to witness it, it's not 'ribbing': it's bullying. It's crucial that the person being ribbed is part of the joke, and should be obvious. It&#x27

More ›