whatevsmate
Joined 13 years ago
Joined 13 years ago
> …
> Your expertise about the system's constraints helps provide important context that static analysis tools can't capture.
So much fawning bullshit bloating the message and the token count. I think this might be the thing with LLMs I dislike most.
Suggestion for prompt writers: “Don’t waste tokens. Keep messages succinct and direct.”
I've never impl PBF or raytracing because my interests haven't gone that way. I don't find SDFs to be a particularly difficult concept to "study up on" either though. It's about as close to math-as-drawing that I've seen and doesn't require much more than a couple triangles and a fragment shader. By contrast I've been learning about SVT for a couple months and still haven't quite pieced together a working impl in webgpu... though I understand there are extensions specifically in support of virtual tiling that WebGPU could pursue in a future version.
Agreed DevEx broadly isn't great when working on graphics. But WebGPU feels like a considerable improvement rather than a step backward.
I'm not arguing that DevEx doesn't exist in graphics programming. Just that it's second to dots on screen. I also find webgpu to be a lot nicer in terms of DevEx than WebGL.
Wdyt? Still revisionist, or maybe just a slightly different framing of the same pov?
I think WebGPU is a decent wrapper for exposing compute and render in the browser. Not perfect by any means - I've had a few paper cuts working with the API so far - but a lot more discoverable and intuitive than I ever found WebGL and OpenGL.
The jumpiness of pages switching and things changing when an AI is driving is extremely disorienting. I find it hard to follow a thread of continuity in the page flashes and ui changes as the bot acts.
Right now it’s like watching a screen recording with no hint as to what I’m “supposed” to be focusing on.
Regardless - I have use cases for this in the mcp/browser automation vein another user mentioned so super interested to see where this goes.
[1] no clear sign of model chosen either. Who knows what software version or system prompt they were blabbing to.
Otherwise-comfortable people searching for anything in the “matrix of oppression” to cling to. Because for the past decade and a half that’s been the easiest way to insert yourself into the attention economy.
There’s no carve out. Anyone pushing thoughtless junk in a PR for someone else to review is eschewing responsibility.
A human’s ability to assess, interrogate, compare, research, and develop intuition are all skills that are entirely independent of the coding tool. Those skills are developed through project work, delivering meaningful stuff to someone who cares enough to use it and give feedback (eg customers), making things go whoosh in production, etc etc.
This is a XY problem and the real Y are galaxy brains submitting unvalidated and shoddy work that make good outcomes harder rather than easier to reach.
And, cynically, I bet a software LLM will be more responsive to your feedback than the over-educated and overpaid junior “engineer” will be. Actually I take it back, I don’t think this take is cynical at all.
I really want an AI to jam with on a canvas rather than to just have it generate the final results.
I have been hoping someone would pick up on the time series forecasting innovations in the LLM space, combine them with data from e.g. the Google quick draw dataset, and turn that into a real-time “painting partner” experience, kind of like chatting with an LLM through brush strokes.
I assumed it was unlikely I’d be able to do the self-work needed while still suffering all the indignities of the employment.
It’s fucking hard work to dig out of that place mate but keep at it. You can and will get there.
Thoughts? [email protected]
Feelings? [email protected]