addcn
Joined 9 years ago
Joined 9 years ago
This is tough though because enterprises go absolutely ballistic over “training on our data” - which is understandable, but will also hold us back.
Pre AI when engineers couldn’t find the answer in commit messages or documentation they would ask the author “why” and that human would “compute” the summary on demand.
I think that’s what I expect to do with these agent sessions - I don’t want more markdown, I want to ask it questions on demand. Git AI (https://github.com/git-ai-project/git-ai) uses the prompts that way. I think that model will win out. Save sessions. Read/ask questions relevant to the current agent’s work.
On asking peers. This is regrettably on the way out today - I’ll ask engineers about complex code they generated and they can’t give good answers. I think it’s because it all happened so fast — they didn’t sit with the problem for 48 hours. So even if they steered the agent thoughtfully it’s hard to remember all the decisions they made a week later.
For example…had to build my own tool to extend git blame and track the AI generated code in our repository and save prompts:
It’s interesting how a relatively small # of synapses can do all abstract reasoning when free from those concerns.
Take the pre-frontal cortex, leave the rest.
And I trust (quite a bit) that whatever he brought to light should be followed up on - if no other reason than to respect his memory. I hope it is taken seriously and those who retaliated find themselves w/o their positions of responsibility and power over other faculty.