miraculixx

10 ms·

1.
by miraculixx 12d ago
I like to think of LLMs as informed dice throwing
2.
by miraculixx 29d ago
Close the PRs as unacceptable.
3.
by miraculixx 29d ago
Who'd want to work in an environment like this? It's not sustainable
4.
by miraculixx 29d ago
Stop accepting these PRs. Ask for a personal 1:1 explanation. Make it the submitter's problem, not yours.
5.
by miraculixx 1mo ago
So then they should get 10-100x more revenue, now that AI does all the marketing and selling.
6.
by miraculixx 4mo ago
Interesting! However there is a somewhat misleading statement in the readme where it says "no code required". Well the workflow specs are in fact code . Other than that I applaud the approach.
7.
by miraculixx 4mo ago
Did they compare it to other models? A lot of this sounds like this is the first time they have applied AI to security, and they are just amazed at the unreasonable performance of a pattern matching machine. Well, it matches patterns. duh
8.
by miraculixx 4mo ago
welcome to the club :) I came to the same conclusion a year ago and uninstalled all the AI assistants that my IDE tried to force on me. Back to good old auto complete and it works great. Feeling productive and on top of things.
9.
by miraculixx 6mo ago
So you continue to show ads to Copilt, just not to the user? If so, not a fix.
10.
by miraculixx 6mo ago
This is interesting. How do you keep this up to date so quickly?
11.
by miraculixx 6mo ago
I agree in general, but how are you ever upgrading any of that? Could be a "sleeper compromise" that only activates sometime in the future. Open problem.
12.
by miraculixx 7mo ago
Sure because it worked great when we tried last time, right? Just spec it out first, and AI will churn out the perfect app. Not. For anyone who hasn't worked in a waterfall project and would like to try: You are kidding yourself. There
13.
by miraculixx 7mo ago
can someone verify that?
14.
by miraculixx 8mo ago
Simon just explores stuff and writes about them. Doesn't mean he uses LLMs for everyting.Antirez likes to question stuff and make them better. Doesn't mean he uses LLMs for everything. Also their experience is not my experience. I
15.
by miraculixx 1y ago
Just stick with pip and venv.
16.
by miraculixx 1y ago
Windows is the root cause here, not pip
17.
by miraculixx 1y ago
+1
18.
by miraculixx 1y ago
+1
19.
by miraculixx 1y ago
Anaconda solved the same problem ~10+ years ago already.
20.
by miraculixx 1y ago
That is not correct. The EU AI Act has no such provision, ans the data mining excemption does not apply as the EU has made clear. As for Switzerland copyrighted material cannot be used unless licensed.
21.
by miraculixx 1y ago
Are these 56 cases distinct from all other cases in the data?
22.
by miraculixx 1y ago
Exactly. The study has been set up to produce this exact result. They essentially limited the human doctors to bare essentials, on specialist cases(!), while providing the LLMs with all sorts of help, including discussion among several AIs.
23.
by miraculixx 1y ago
As any AI researcher knows, if you have a model that does 4x better than the naive baseline (the humans, in this case), you are likely looking at overfit, not real-life performance. This study is just slop, and you can tell so by the mere
24.
by miraculixx 1y ago
To fly means "to soar through air; move through the air with wings" (etymonline) That is pretty much an accurate discription of what planes and birds do. To plan means "to reason with intent". That is very much not wha
25.
by miraculixx 1y ago
Very much in support of this. The use of anthropmorphic or even biological terms are entirely misguided. All they do is drive a narrative that is very much belitting natural intelligence.
26.
by miraculixx 1y ago
Unfortunately that's not a review but a hype-driving oversimplification of what the paper says.
27.
by miraculixx 1y ago
"Hallucination" is just to term we use to say "this result is not what it should be". The model always uses the very same process, it does not do one thing for "hallucinations" and something else for "corr
28.
by miraculixx 1y ago
> This doesn't seem to happen very often in classical programming, does it? Try concurrent programming. It happens all the time.
29.
by miraculixx 1y ago
We know how they work. It's just that it works better than expected. Which of course doesn't mean we don't know, it just means there are second-order effects that are non-obvious. Intelligence is not implied.
30.
by miraculixx 1y ago
There is no evidence to this end. There is lots of claims, but claims are not evidence.

More ›