stunpix
Joined 13 years ago
Joined 13 years ago
After reading this writing, I was really curious "are we really got a breakthrough" so I subscribed to a Claude to personally check the state of the matter. As my personal test, I'm using a task that must be relatively simple for an experienced programmer: write an SSH agent that manages keys. The protocol is very simple, and the agents exist for decades now. I already tested that a year ago with Claude, and I was curious how it would do this time.
I installed up the Claude Code CLI tool, created CLAUDE.md with instructions that sounded like "this project is to build a fully functional SSH agent application that listens on a UNIX socket and implements the SSH agent protocol according to RFC specification <link> and all functionality must be covered with tests, create a plan, track progress, etc. The ultimate goal is to have a fully functional application with all SSH agent features." There were more details, of course, but you got it.
Opus 4.6 model worked autonomously for 30 minutes or so. During the process, it had been producing non-compilable code, which it had to fix. Then it stopped at a half-baked project that wasn't working as an SSH agent even closely and had zero tests pretending the job was done.
The truly intelligent technology should finish the project. Why did it stop? How is it intelligent if it makes mistakes that it needs to fix? Why can’t it finish the project while it understands a goal? How much must I push it to finish a project? How someone can claim that "this" is going to replace us?
I can't buy someone's claims that “we are one step before replacing everyone’s jobs" when the facts are saying that nothing has changed for the last year and LLMs are literally not capable of finishing things or concentrating on small important details. They always miss something important. What are we talking about here? Snake oil. This is not intelligence; the technology is a world's blurred snapshot compressed into a couple of gigabytes blob and acts as a dumb parrot.
If you are solely an English writer then yes. Using md with some languages will quickly turn you into its hater. Certain formatting symbols aren’t easily accessible in some layouts, like backticks for code or ^ for superscript. Some symbols require extra keystrokes like ~ in german. Some layouts will require finger yoga exercises. Basically, any other text markups based on English (including LaTeX) are unfriendly to other languages. Thus an abnormal popularity of md across the apps makes them much less friendly for non-English users. Mobile typing pushes this pain to another level.
That's not how a math working in a communist country: it doesn't mean that the rest 80% were able to do so freely.
If you think that you was able to move freely from one city to another "because I wish to try luck at a new place", then think about: how can you move to another city if you can't sell/buy apartments as they almost all owned by the state? You only can move if you got a job at a new place. Given that by the law you can't be unemployed (you could even face a criminal case if not), so you can't just go to "somewhere".
If you are usual worker that somehow managed out to get a new job in another city, then you highly likely (not always) will get an apartment from a factory/state for free, but… What was a chance for you to get a something good by being from another city? Provided apartments almost always were tiny, usually no amenities, and overall living conditions were terrible. Often people were getting just rooms in communes. To get a normal apartment you had to "get into a queue" and wait for 10-20 years. Thus in every city was a huge amount of people waiting for their apartment. When in the city a lot of people are waiting their apartments for years, why someone will give something decent to a newcomer? Yeah, highly skilled/experienced managers or scientists were a bit more privileged, so they could expect of getting something good without queueing.
Some people were trying to swap apartments with those who wanted to move into their city. Needless to say about chances of getting something in this way.
International tourism. It was available mainly to party management and leaders. From time to time a best "workers of socialistic labor" were able to visit other "friendly" (from socialistic block) countries as a "reward", but only after party's approval and only in groups. Never individually. Also such tourism had a strict rules for travelers (what you can bring back with you or what you can visit there). Thus more than 90% of people never were abroad.
The only 100% freedom to move was an inner tourism. You was able to visit almost 100% of territory inside the country as a tourist. You also can't travel across the country for a year like modern bloggers because (as I said above) you can't be unemployed.
Is that a freedom as you know it?
NO! This is a HUGE fallacy (if not a lie). A "kolkhoz people" (kolkhoz stands for "collective farm") had no passports at all till 1974 and they had NO right to leave their living territories without identity documents. Sort of a slavery. As of 1970 the "kolkhoz people" were ≈20% (or ≈50 millions) of the population.
> Most of my childhood friends were children of Moscow newcomers.
This explains. Moscow always was a sort of "another world" than the rest of USSR.