brumar

How do we measure and compare prediction quality in a symbolic/deterministic context that also punish for complexity? I struggled on this in my phd thesis and had to brew my own Minimum Description Length implementation because I found nothing applicable. The statisticians I interrogated were like "don't try to do model selection on symbolic models, make them probabilistic and work from there"

My body marks are a good memento mori anchor for me. I appreciate them for that. Of what importance could they be anyway if today was my last day.

Very good. I have a listening experience close to elevenlabs. But sometimes you can get "failed" segments so you need to detect them and retry/repair automatically. One example is the fading volume.

Same here. 75% of my podcast listening time come from content generated by claude and voxtral these days (tts from mistral).

I am all for the /s marker.

Downvoting to hell first degree interpretation is a bit punishing for people who do not have a radar for sarcasm.

not sure I understand your question, but subagents are used extensively to avoid a large main context window.

Good point. I had to tweak a bit the system to get more positional analysis because this is something I wanted too get. I think it's still shying away on this aspect. When it does dwell on it, I feel that when the output describe what should be the plan of both camps, it's quite convincing but only a much stronger player (or me with stockfish) could really assess this.

Anyway I am with you that deep positional appraisal is very hard and we should not expect too much from this set of skills on that front.

Yep, they are quite bad without stockfish. You can test it with the playchess skill in my repo. Maybe 1200/1300, who knows? Still I do think that they can, with enough time, explore multiple variations where they confront their naivety to stockfish and build up a compact picture on why move Y should have been played instead of move X. That was my intuition when building this skill.

No need to apologize. I like reading HN for comments that don't beat around the bush.

It's true that it's costly. I never tried to optimize it. In a way I feel this hacky project doesn't deserve its place on the front page. It's just me hacking around on Claude Code to get something I like. Take it as a proof of concept if you will. I'd be happy to see lighter alternatives.

> Then presenting it as a project or tool of value to share to others is delusional

Here I see a gap in your reasoning. Lazy and costly, sure. But useless, I'm not so sure. In my world, a vibecoded tool can be useful enough to be shared, despite the risks. Claude Code itself is almost entirely written by Claude, according to its creator. Yet I use it every day.

No it does not help the quality of the analysis from what I saw, but it makes the analysis much more interesting, because it can challenge my wrong judgement and answer the questions that I asked myself out loud.

Very interesting project, is Maia used in this platform?

Yes.

Thanks for trying it out! I'd be happy to see how it goes for you and compare our implementation notes if the analysis you got is not too bad.