geraneum

5 ms·

31.
by geraneum 23d ago
Do you happen to source everything you consume locally? From the phone and computer to building materials, clothing, food, healthcare equipment, etc.? If not, you’re in for a surprise when shit hits the fan.
32.
by geraneum 23d ago
> All those layers have been "left behind" to become specializations. This never happened. The people who understood and worked with all of that still exist. I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s not more of them now. What happene
33.
by geraneum 26d ago
Seems like author’s main focus recently is AI and agents unsurprisingly, hence the suspicion. But it seems like he has a backgrounded in relevant fields in the past.
34.
by geraneum 26d ago
Yup, that’s why it’s important to ground these arguments in reality.
35.
by geraneum 26d ago
> Is anthropomorphizing a real problem? Of course it is. Anthropomorphizing is in our nature, but it doesn’t mean we have to entertain it and extend it to everything. A poet can anthropomorphize clouds beautifully and I’d enjoy his poem,
36.
by geraneum 1mo ago
I don’t watch sitcoms anymore. I come read HN for these gems.
37.
by geraneum 1mo ago
> outcomes are evaluated purely empirically How does that look like?
38.
by geraneum 1mo ago
I’ve read LLM outputs on a piece of code or topic that I already understand or hand written before, and lately, it’s so confusing sometimes that I need to reread a couple of times or focus too mich to decipher the writing style.
39.
by geraneum 1mo ago
We, developers/tech-employees (safe to assume since we’re on HN) are the “entire class of workers” that the article is talking about. The premise is losing faith in the future of our profession. Which is something that’s openly adverti
40.
by geraneum 1mo ago
Remember, our misery is some potential investor’s financial prospect. We read these articles with different eyes. There are people who are the real audience and salivate when they read these sentiments.
41.
by geraneum 1mo ago
The author has discovered the red tape.
42.
by geraneum 1mo ago
Blimey, it’s a mystery why they don’t let me take my jigsaw to the “community of hand saw enthusiasts”.
43.
by geraneum 1mo ago
> observe that the agent day after day do handle user input safely How do you observe the issues that aren’t apparent via a GUI? Do you notice the circular logic in your reasoning?
44.
by geraneum 1mo ago
> I don't review code that either works or doesn't - most HTML and CSS layout code for example. There I test it on desktop and mobile and commit it if it works. Good example of what not to review if you're working on your
45.
by geraneum 1mo ago
> It's novel because previous rounds of automation were about automating specific tasks or well-scoped functions. Evidently, this has not really changed with LLMs and coding agents. It’s what AI companies are betting on though.
46.
by geraneum 1mo ago
Does the code get reviewed? How do you deal with increased amount of code that may need to be looked at?
47.
by geraneum 1mo ago
Unfortunately people sometimes get defensive against this take. But I think treating the LLM as you described can make you a better LLM user and help get better output. It helps understand the failure modes better, and moderate one’s relian
48.
by geraneum 2mo ago
Then ask it to fix it. When “fixed”, ask the same question again and you’ll get a similar response again!
49.
by geraneum 2mo ago
I’m terribly sorry on their behalf. I hope the expression of their experience has not hurt Claude’s feelings (IPO valuation). Won’t happen again.
50.
by geraneum 2mo ago
> Never write READMEs, docstrings, or comments. I will write those myself later. And yes, I really mean this. The precise and rigorous practice of “engineering” in 2026.
51.
by geraneum 2mo ago
That pesky “scientific method” bothers these corps sometimes, so one can play fast and loose with numbers and conclusions for all sort of reasons. No need to worry about reproducibility, rigor, scrutiny, etc. not good for IPO and stocks.
52.
by geraneum 2mo ago
This is what you get when you prompt claude to avoid –
53.
by geraneum 2mo ago
You’re absolutely right to push back. It was indeed a school. I’ll save <schoo_name> in my memory for the future.
54.
by geraneum 2mo ago
Stata is better in statistics than we are. Why doesn’t that produce guesses?
55.
by geraneum 2mo ago
> Anthropic has never advocated for a ban on open-weights models. If you wonder why this is written as an opening to a list of reasons that advocate for banning the open weight models, it’s because
56.
by geraneum 2mo ago
How does the AI guess?
57.
by geraneum 2mo ago
Even on a less dangerous level, repeated mistakes can be detrimental to your business. Imagine a typical ecommerce app for selling anything. Mess with people’s orders and money and you’ll go out of business or get sued or get a bad reputati
58.
by geraneum 2mo ago
It might be because it was going out of its way before and had too much of a blast radius, and now they could have changed the RLHF (or other tricks in their sleeve) to get what you're seeing now. The reason it swings is that they can&
59.
by geraneum 2mo ago
I read this as the model being less steerable. I was bitten by this just today where I had a local Postgres instance running, and prompted opus 5 to run a server against it, but forgot to give it the password. Instead of asking for the pass
60.
by geraneum 2mo ago
What better way to spend token. I’m amazed that people talk about this as it’s a good thing!

More ›