J_Shelby_J

This mechanism is going to be the breaking point for Claude and Codex.

The providers are incentivized to get users to accept full permissions so they can push more features and deeper integration into their ecosystem. Codex desktop for example reallllly wants to use computer use. So don’t expect them to role out sane controls like restricting behavior to specific directories and commands. It would be bad for business.

So now we’re in a situation where if there is effectively two modes: one where it’s impossible to get any work done without physically sitting at the computer and hitting approve constantly, or just letting AI have full control over increasingly integrated tools.

In the end, I think people will realize just how insane it is to let something they don’t control access every part of their digital life, and abandon these tools for open source alternatives that aren’t existential threats to their personal privacy.

I've noticed that out of all LLMs I've ever used that Fable is the MOST LLM; the text it produces is abomination. It's impressive how much I hate it. It is such an awful writer - it assumes the reader has zero context and therefore gives every single bit of context and detail - which is nice if you're writing a legal document I suppose. But it uses, niche, $10 words to describe every facet of everything it's discussing. I had it re-write some docs and I ended up rewriting 1k lines of of Fable torment nexus text to around 100. Because guess what, someone reading highly technical docs has a knowledge base that allows us to compress the topic into a much tighter representation.

Yeah but like, tests encode behavior… sometimes I go all day without running a test. Sometimes multiple days. I’ve been using unit tests less and debug asserts more and more now days anyways. Encoding behavior as close the relevant code as possible. And using types and type state to minimize invariants. Idk, but it seems like such a smell when my coding agent drops 10 unit tests for a 300 LoC module. It means it did a bad job of writing the code in the first place.

Anyways, if the code compiles, but the behavior is wrong, a test might be useful. But so is reading the code… so I’m skeptical of rerunning tests constantly.

I interviewed with them and had a great experience despite it ultimately not being a good fit due to communication issues and a bad flu coming on in the final interview - they, and Michael especially, was very kind and understanding.

Anyone can have bad security. No one cares. But you can convince those who don’t know better that breaking bad security with an LLM is a once in a civilization investing opportunity. You just need to convince a handful of billionaires and market makers to get on board.

How much would someone have to pay you to take the fall for bad security? A million? A billion? 500b? The stake at play puts it in the realm of geopolitics.

Model I with four thumb buttons is irreplaceable for me

I recently built a usb hub.

I got a box, some usb cables that have a female end and are fitted to mate to the box. If you are curious, it’s a box made for pro-audio equipment with precut holes. The holes are made for xlr ports, and the usb cables are terminated with xlr ports.

Now I have a usb hub where all four ports are wired directly to my motherboard’s ports. I probably should write a blog post with a parts list.

Agreed. That seemed to be the consensus in /r/rust

Look, if you can’t take the time to communicate with me, I won’t waste my time listening to you.

Writing is not hard. It’s a fundamental skill. Even before LLMs, any successful professional had strong writing skills, and those that didn’t were treading water at best. This isn’t classism. It’s just that we literally can not communicate if you aren’t willing to put in the effort. And if you don’t need to take the time to put it in writing then I don’t need to read it.

LLMs literally are incapable of writing in the way humans are. Generating a string of tokens is a completely different task than composing prose be it fiction, documentation, or product releases. It would take an insane harness on the par of a complexity of a coding harness to write at the level of college graduate.

So when I see someone saying LLMs are suitable for this use I must assume that they don’t think what they are writing is worth the effort or they don’t understand how effective written communication works. Either way, I’m resentful of it in the way someone reviewing a slop PR is.

I’ve been thinking about this a lot this week after having fable try to write some design docs and it outputting 1k line docs which I had to manually rewrite to 200-300 lines. I should of just did it myself to start.

Like set an generic marker struct IsEncrypted<T> where T is yes or now and only allow its state to change when proven and then write the shutdown function to only take the yes variant?

Texas is where companies go to die.

Meh, the amount of effort required to keep up to date with the python ecosystem churn is around the same as learning rust. More so if you are starting from scratch.

I quit python after realizing the amount of effort it required to just implement the tooling for a project… when all of that comes included with rust. I have spent maybe an hour in the last year thinking about tooling. Glorious.

But yeah, I feel for you. It is an impossible sell when they pay off is impossible to understand without a Time Machine and the only thing known about the cost is that it’s high. But for new people and projects, I can’t imagine starting with python in 2026.

Anthropic and OpenAI are stuck on slower and more expensive nvidia hardware. It doesn’t scale like googles TPUs.