turlockmike

How do you tell the difference between an AI generated PR and a human one? Unless the dev explicitly allows the AI to attribute itself on the PR?

Eventually everything will be a use tax. It's the only fair tax and there will always be loopholes otherwise.

Novel discoveries are now marketing ads.

My general principal is the cost of deleting code should be as low as possible and that includes the entire application as long as the data is around and easy to repurpose then the program itself should be as deletable as possible

It lacks a critical self, but the weights are there for in context learning and nudging behaviour. It's goal is to complete whatever task is given. You need to make sure the outcome you want is clearly defined.

You don't need elaborate prompts, just a few lines

"All code must have corresponding tests written ahead of time to prove the code meets the specification" is sufficient for most use cases. Prose can help nudge it more if it isn't adhearing consistently.

The better way to do this is give them each an inbox and outbox folder and a user account on a Unix machine.

They can write to their outbox, have it be sent to the other's inbox. A watcher can watch for new messages in the inbox and trigger the other agent to read it. You can have the thread Id of the messages correspond to the session id.

We don't need to reinvent things that Unix provides.

This website and article promote the destruction of property. If you disagree with something, you can engage civily, encourage people to vote with you, run for elections. Violence is not the answer.

Banks didn't do this before 2018 as aggressively. Reputational stuff is always been there and chargebacks have always been there. This law is why they've been so aggressive over the last few years. There's nothing else that has changed

Those bills are the reasons banks/credit card companies are pushing this since it holds them liable.

FOSTA-SESTA is the source of this. A well intentioned bill, that, once again, has unintended consequences beyond it's original intention.

Mastercard/Visa/Banks don't want legal liability.

It's because it's a weird mix of subsidies, price controls, regulations and bureaucracy that has completely distorted the market incentives.

The best way to prompt an LLM is to describe the outcome you want, that's it. They are trained as task completers. A clear outcome is way better than a process.

If the LLM fails, either you didn't describe your outcome sufficiently or is misinterpreted what you said or it couldn't do it (rare).

Common errors should be encoded as context for future similar tasks, don't bloat skills with stuff that isn't shown to be necessary.

LLMs don't care about mcp vs CLI. CLIs enable LLMs to fetch/mutate data and build scripts with the same program. I think of it like a Linux dev in a box. Sometimes you want to just call a tool, sometimes you want to write a small program that calls that tool instead.

MCPs are basically just JSON-rpc. The benefit is that if you have applications that require an API key, you can build a server to control access (especially for enterprise). It's the same as REST apis, except by following a specific convention we can take advantage of generic tools (like the one I built) and means you don't need to rely on poor documentations to connect or train a model to use your very specific CLI.