mezyt

Yeah, I'm prioritizing the issue and PR then pre-reviewing them in an active open source repository absolutely drowned in LLM contributions.

386

I personally never was affected by a bug in Claude code and I've been using five in parallel for a year, for 10 hours a day, everyday.

Right, but this happened during the night (11PM) and over 8 hours instead of one in order to delay the alarm and maximise damage (source: Le monde).

I was wondering how anyone could reach the token limit of a 200$/month Claude subscription. I never did on a 20$ one, and I'm parallelizing Claude to the absolute limit of what I can reasonably keep in mind. And I do that day and night, on week-end too with open-source. Now I'm absolutely convinced that it's by doing crap architectures and design that require 200k token of context before adding a single checkbox. If you apply good design principle and course correct the AI in real time before it commits to really stupid way to fix things (i.e. you don't ask it or let it do things that would make zero sense if you had to do it yourself), then the vibe coding cost way less and is way faster and easier to reason about.

Makes sense for small tool like ls, and doesn't for things that are actually complex like the python language or sqlite.

ruff is a rust rewrite of flake8. Got bought by OpenAI after a meteoric rise in the python ecosystem.

Great case where rust works well too. I won't cite every famous libs that got rewritten in rust but it wasn't all with LLM.

Turn out people like to ask low quality questions, as evidenced by the reputation of Stackoverflow moderators.

The worse system is already getting gamed. There's already too much on the line for researchers/students, so they don't admit any wrong doing or retract anything. What's the worse that could happen by adding a layer of trust in the h-index ?

The metaphor doesn't match very well here because stackoverflow is not selling new tape at a premium but giving them for free and reading a stackoverflow answer is harder than asking an LLM.

Could be that AI companies feeding on stackoverflow are selling tape at a premium, and if they tell you it's only supervised learning from a lot of human experts it's going to destroy the nice bubble they have going on around AGI.

Could also be that you have to do the actual theory / practice / correction work for your basal ganglia to "know" about something without thinking about it (i.e. learn), contrary to the novel where the knowledge is directly inserted in your brain. If everyone use AI to skip the "practice" phase lazily then there's no one to make the AI evolve anymore. And the world is not a Go board where the AI can learn against itself indefinitely.