jadar

7 ms·

1.
by jadar 4d ago
Guessing this is poking fun of Dario. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49672510
2.
by jadar 6d ago
I forsook RN years ago. I am not a huge fan of the JavaScript ecosystem in the first place, and the UX of RN apps is not the best. Instead, I adopted Kotlin Multiplatform (shortly after their memory management overhaul). I haven't been
3.
by jadar 7d ago
This is so good at replicating the experience of frustration, then relief when it finally does what you asked it to do in the first place!
4.
by jadar 13d ago
I did this as well. I found that it was really inefficient because if I was doing anything with a significant amount of text, it has to shuttle all of that through the model to the MCP invocation. It was way better to work with temporary fi
5.
by jadar 13d ago
This seems like a very reasonable and thoughtful response. You have plenty of password manager options if it bothers you.
6.
by jadar 14d ago
The author says it's about 700k LoC that he's worked on for 20 years.[1] I don't know how many tokens that arrives at, but that seems non-trivial. [1] https://simonwillison.net/2026/Sep/2/rick-b
7.
by jadar 17d ago
This. It’s easy to let happen too. If you’re on a machine that’s not behind NAT then it’s really easy to pwn yourself.
8.
by jadar 17d ago
Couldn’t you say that about any Arch spinoff? Seems to be the no true scotsman fallacy.
9.
by jadar 17d ago
It depends on what distinction you’re making… If you are asking concerning security, the answer is that it’s an insecure default that should have protected an unwitting user. If you are asking concerning consistency with real world situatio
10.
by jadar 21d ago
Hold on, these say no deal has been reached yet.
11.
by jadar 23d ago
I get it the sentiment behind the post…but it has some “let them eat cake” vibes though.
12.
by jadar 28d ago
That works for a couple turns but the model reverts after just a couple turns. Not to mention after compaction.
13.
by jadar 28d ago
Cue the N.I.C.E comparisons.
14.
by jadar 1mo ago
I appreciate that the OP puts his finger on the problem. I think he's right. I wish there was more optimism or ideas about how to solve it, though. How do I fight against it as an engineer? Or, how do I become a "good" engine
15.
by jadar 1mo ago
Yet we have the option to decide not to participate. That is an option.
16.
by jadar 1mo ago
You're right. But I used it specifically because of the open letter calling for open models — or at least for not banning them — which went around recently and represented a very large number of tech and AI companies. Anthropic seemed
17.
by jadar 1mo ago
Isn't this the opposite of what everyone is saying should happen? That is, lead with open models -- or at least "openness" and don't leave the capabilities in the hands of an elite few? Did they learn nothing from the Hu
18.
by jadar 1mo ago
That's some form of success.
19.
by jadar 1mo ago
I stopped at "f*ck*ss". Irreverent drivel is unserious and a waste of time.
20.
by jadar 2mo ago
A compiler is not an LLM, and I do not want to equivocate, but there are aspects of similarity. We do not assume people read the bytes of machine code to ensure it’s correct — there could be mistakes. We also write and run automated tests t
21.
by jadar 2mo ago
Do you have some browser extension that replaces phrases with that? That quote doesn't exist in the piece.
22.
by jadar 2mo ago
This reads almost dishonestly. > Anthropic has never advocated for a ban on open-weights models. This is not an unqualified never. The very next sentence makes a qualified statement: "Open-weights models that don’t have dangerous ca
23.
by jadar 2mo ago
Self-hosting a language used to be standard practice. These days that's become a bit more controversial, but I definitely wouldn't lump that in as a sign of obsession.
24.
by jadar 2mo ago
This doesn't answer the question it asks.
25.
by jadar 2mo ago
I know everything is told from a perspective, but I find the Marxist “aristocrat / bourgeois” lens rather tired and severely anachronistic. This is told as if Luther and the Magisterial Reformers were just “siding with the aristocracy”
26.
by jadar 2mo ago
Completely agree. That doesn't change the fact that people are fickle and want to have their cake even as they're eating it.
27.
by jadar 2mo ago
Lol imagine if he had changed his profile pic just for this. I don't think that would make him look any better.
28.
by jadar 2mo ago
I tend to agree. But the devil's advocate in me says that then they'd be accused of not having empathy. That sort of thing might work in Europe — but for a US company, I think you have to pay some lip service to emotions.
29.
by jadar 2mo ago
> It’s just not stuff LLMs are good at. But then you're back at the question from the OP of "why not?" Is it lack of good examples in the training data? Is there something of code "goodness" that goes beyond phen
30.
by jadar 2mo ago
Isn't that how AI written software gets better too? By steering the model towards the goals of the user? I don't know if it's a question of how many features to feed to the model, either. Of course, overwhelm the context with

More ›