andrewljohnson

“send cold emails with enriched context”

What’s the difference between cold and spam?

You either need to quit or keep your head down, I can’t tell which.

This sounds like a constraint I model in my bin packing optimization routine.

Bin packing is theoretically NP Hard but practically solved all the time on real world datasets.

Pro-tip - the older it is, the more likely it is to be good.

This sounds like a broken culture to me. Teams shouldn't tolerate it... it is both harmful and contagious.

A lot of organizations right now are dealing with the "Claude says..." problem.

It's not that you should never include any AI generated text in a conversation with other engineers, but you mostly shouldn't.

AI is a tool to help you understand/debug/review yourself, but you shouldn't be conferring authority to your AI (because it doesn't understand anything and is often wrong in the text it spews), and you shouldn't be running an AI for other people, they should run it themselves.

You can just look at the diff when you do a pull request, no prayer needed, and if you want it to be “surgical” in that way, your prompt (and agents.md) can be specific.

You can also unit test the function to better assure behavior didn’t change.

I’m fine with bulk review, it just has to get reviewed before a merge. You don’t need to review the LLM output as you work except as it aids you to work.

LLM editing should be done to produce deterministic output.

That is, the LLM should produce a diff, and the user should accept the diff. It seems like a bad pattern to just tell the LLM to edit any long document without that sort of visibility. Same goes for prose as for code.

I am familiar with all the particulars, check my HN profile ;)