pelario

> If an AI can replace me on the mental aspects of work, and robotics are on their way to replacing humanity on the physical aspects of work... then what's left?

At the risk of sounding new age, my answer to this is "emotional work".

What exactly that would mean in the equivalent of the post-agrarian society that LLMs might bring, I cannot know.

The link does not seem to be working

This should be the first comment. I wrote some criticism, mostly because many internal contradictions in the article. Then, I notice the structure...

"The accountability gap" Here’s the question nobody’s asking: when it goes wrong, who carries the bag? (..)

"What to do instead"

"The craft still matters"

> It hasn’t thought about the problem at all. It’s pattern-matching against its training data and producing the most plausible-sounding response.

The article kind of lost me here. Agents are way more than that, today. And the author knows it, as later it says stuff like

> Claude will never do this. It’s trained to be helpful.

But the first phrase just tell me author just have a deep dislike for agents and it's looking for rationalizations for that feeling.

Part of the criticism is on point, sure. But if it "being trained to be helpful" is a problem, it's fixable. It can "be trained to be more critical".

Later:

> But it wasn’t designed for your team. (..) It was designed for the median of everything Claude has seen. A generic best practice for a generic problem at a generic company. Which is to say, it was designed for nobody.

That's non-sense. Anybody who understand algorithms know that, sure, on a first instance you have a "good algorithm" that has a good performance on average, or in worst-case. But then, you can design algorithms that are adaptive to the input. Same applies here.

could you tell more details or links about that ?

From the article:

"As temperature approaches zero from the negative side, the model output will again be deterministic — but this time, the least likely tokens will be output."

I understand this as, a negative number far from zero is also quite random (just with a distribution that will produce unlikely tokens).

> Personally, I hate it; I don't like magic or black boxes.

So, no compilers for you neither ?

(To be fair: I'm not loving the whole vibe coding thing. But I'm trying to approach this wave with open mind, and looking for the good arguments in both side. This is not one of them)

That's simply not true.

There are plenty of smart devices (including lighbulbs, sensor movements, and what not)t hat use bluetooh, or protocols like Zigbee that enable all kind of functionality without wifi password.