scriptsmith
Joined 10 years ago
Joined 10 years ago
It feels like like the AI agents can't help themselves sometimes, and the judgement exercised around what's included and omitted is baffling.
But maybe READMEs have always been this bad, and AI agents have raised the baseline?
https://www.telstra.com.au/exchange/what-we-ve-learned-from-...
https://www.telstra.com.au/content/dam/tcom/dynamic-media-pr...
Has their reputation tanked so much that the alternatives get all the buzz? Or is it that non-enterprise users are priced out by the usage costs, so no free marketing?
Maybe it would do better with the new Gemma 4 models, which the Chrome devs have been hinting at moving to. And why the API doesn't let you introspect / pick the model, I'm still not sure.
As OP says, it shines in constrained environments where the model is transforming user-owned data. Definitely less useful for anything more open-ended.
https://adsm.dev/posts/prompt-api/#which-browsers-support-th...
Packagers might eventually disable that but I tested this behaviour in chromium 148 a few hours ago, and it would download the weights but has trouble running them.
I don't get that from the spec. Closest thing I could find in the Writing and Assistance APIs spec [1] (which the Prompt API refers to) says:
> [It] allows the user agent to prompt the user for permission
But that's talking more about initiating the 'download' process more than choosing the model.
I think Chrome wants the browser to be 'opinionated' about the model used however, rather than letting the webpage pick, at least for now.
[1] https://webmachinelearning.github.io/writing-assistance-apis...
Weirdly though, chromium won't be able to actually use the model even though it can download it, because the inference engine is a closed-source blob.
https://adsm.dev/posts/prompt-api/#which-browsers-support-th...
https://adsm.dev/posts/prompt-api/#which-browsers-support-th...