robbie-c

> That's dumb and just an excuse. If it were true, why not keep the whole team and empower them and deliver 10x the existing value?

That requires having enough good new ideas for everyone to work on, and sadly a lot of companies don't have those

It doesn't seem so easy, because if you can easily dismiss a collection of digital neurons then why is it so hard to dismiss a collection of biological neurons as being conscious?

The best way I have found to think about this is that consciousness is a property of a collection, like temperature. One atom does not have a temperature but if you have enough of them together then it's a useful enough property to talk about. Similarly, one human neuron does not have consciousness but if you put enough of them together then they do.

> it will not be worth what the loan assumed

I'm begging people to take the time to write things themselves rather than getting Claude to write for them.

If you want human effort from readers, please put in human effort while writing.

While I'm here - I recently optimized our PR review skill to make better use of the KV cache.

Previously, it loaded up the diff, persona and prompt, and wrote those into the first message for each of 6 sub-agent reviewers. The prompt was templated with the persona name, so was slightly different for each reviewer.

My optimized version had a common first message with diff + prompt, and a script to run to atomically claim a persona. It also runs the first reviewer before the rest to warm the KV cache, and the agent doesn't launch the rest of the subagents until the first persona has been claimed (which means that the LLM is running, and therefore the KV cache is warm). The agent has a script it runs which does the waiting for it.

Agents 2-6 only run once the KV cache is warm, and because the intro message including the diff is shared, it's there in the cache. Only the persona file is different.

In my testing this brought down the cost of a review by ~half, though of course this depends on how big the diff is, how many agent are launched, and what model is used.

I'm begging people to write articles themselves rather than letting Claude do it for them.

I want an expert opinion, if I just wanted to ask an LLM I have my own.

How can this article not mention the KV cache even once?

> There are people who do, - And there are those who criticize.

There’s no need for that. I’ve done plenty.

Is it on topic to complain about the various claude-isms in this article? I don't know any actual humans that write titles like "Two floors the rate card hides".

I find my brain disengages once I suspect something of being written by an LLM. If the author didn't put much effort into writing it, should I expect them to have put much effort into fact-checking it?

Edit: this specific title has been deleted from the article. That was not my point! Please put in more effort into writing things that you want others to read! Rather than putting in low effort but being better at hiding it.

They sort of are, in that they want subscription users to have clients that behave well with the KV cache etc.

If you don't use a subscription, and pay per token instead, you can easily move to another harness.

A family member stayed in a hotel in Dubai recently and on returning said how incredible the staff were and willing they were to help them, and my response was "no shit"

Nothing has changed, just OP found the mirror of the main repo with the ee/ folder removed. That repo has been up for most of the lifetime of the company.

PostHog has always been open source. I'm not sure why this has been shared on HN at all.

The previous parser is mostly a declarative grammar file, which is extremely readable. It codegens a C++ parser, which is hard to read. It depends which of those you count as the previous parser's source code!

In the future, we'd make changes by modifying the ANTLR parser first, then using the same approach as in the blog post to get the new parser to parity. We have no plans to get rid of the C++ parser as an oracle!