causalityltd

5 ms·

1.
by causalityltd 6mo ago
Thanks for reading! The claim isn't that LLMs can't pick a topology, they obviously do, every time they generate code. The claim is that the spec doesn't determine which topology is correct, because multiple valid topologies
2.
Why the Spec-to-Code Gap Cannot Be Closed?(causalitylimited.com)
4 points by causalityltd 6mo ago|2 comments
3.
by causalityltd 6mo ago
The key insight here is that danger doesn't require sentience or even intelligence, just behavior. And not even emergent behavior. This is plain evolutionary pressure applied to mutation-equivalent recombination of personality files. W
4.
by causalityltd 6mo ago
The other commenter explained that the policy was applied as reciprocal, "The declaration of no-LLM was done so you are not judged yourself by an LLM." Basically, they didn't want LLM near their own paper's review.
5.
by causalityltd 6mo ago
yeah but will you promise to do it by hand and then use a calculator? Or will you have every intention to keep the promise but it would seem such a chore by now (cuz calculator is such a part of your workflow) that you would minimize the sa
6.
by causalityltd 6mo ago
oh, now I got it, thanks. I was being too generous :) It fits though, quite funnily: They did not want LLM near their own papers because they could not have imagined injecting prompts to get a good review and that's the same lack-of-aw
7.
by causalityltd 6mo ago
Also, however much you manage the project, eventually you do need to actually "build". You can't deliver on hype alone. Or maybe you can, but only for some news cycles or VC meetings. The user will eventually need the promise
8.
by causalityltd 6mo ago
Is this written in the linked article? Or the info is from other places online? Because I didn't see this. Article seems to say that this choice was given just for review (how you will review not how you will get reviewed) and the cons
9.
by causalityltd 6mo ago
The declaration of no-LLM was done for social prestige or maybe self-deception of self-sufficiency like "I don't need LLM". And when it was time to do the actual work, the dependency kicked in like drugs. A lesson for all of
10.
by causalityltd 6mo ago
Causes mostly add up: molecular kinetic energies aggregate to temperature, collisions to pressure, imperfections to measurement errors, etc. So, normal or CLT is the attractor state for the unexceptional world. BUT for the exceptional worl
11.
by causalityltd 6mo ago
The cognitive dissonance comes from the tension between the-spec-as-management-artifact vs the-spec-as-engineering-artifact. Author is right that advocates are selling the first but second is the only one which works. For a manager, the spe
12.
by causalityltd 6mo ago
This started from my comment on the recent 'Language Model Teams as Distributed Systems' paper thread: [ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47408745 ]. I asked Claude to actually write/post the suggested essa
13.
by causalityltd 6mo ago
Unless Miscrosoft does something, this impression of LinkedIn Speak is here to stay. LinkedIn Speak: Unless Microsoft takes action, this LinkedIn-optimized communication style is the new industry standard. It's all about leveraging sy
14.
by causalityltd 6mo ago
Apart from rediscovering all the problems with distributed systems, I think LM teams will also rediscover their own version of the mythical man-month, and very quickly too. There were 3 core insights: adding people makes the project later,