01100011

Is there a search widget available for iOS? I tried installing the kagi for safari app, but apple’s intentionally scary warnings did it’s job and convinced me not to enable it. I'd rather just have a widget on my homescreen which opens results in a safari tab. I built one with shortcuts, but it’s ugly.

If you think the NSA and other government agencies haven’t gone to the big labs in the past year and said “tone it down guys, we need to stay two steps ahead of everyone else” then you don’t understand the role or the seriousness of these agencies in pursuing their missions.

A lot of us already make a lot of money. It’s not about the money. It’s about the work. I would love to work on the things OpenAI is working on. I don’t expect it would be much of a pay raise. But I’m not moving my family for it.

Unfortunately no remote openings and a very limited set of offices. You’re missing out on a lot of talent.

What makes it go away? People can reject datacenters, AI slop(to the degree they can detect it) and AI search results, but what stops the wave of automation coming for SWEs and IT workers? We are the least able to resist. AI already does a better job than the majority of us. It is, even with much higher token costs, vastly cheaper. So what shoves it back into the box?

A lot of folks, many of them our most capable programmers, are fighting the last war. It’s like they think AI is going away and we’ll all work like it’s 2019 again.

Can we get apple to enforce consistent 'back' behavior in iOS next?

I just switched after being an Android user since the dawn of the smartphone era. There are some improvements over Android so I'll give them credit but holy hell is navigation just a complete mess. Every app seems to behave differently, and even within the same app you'll see inconsistencies.

Would it really be that hard to provide a universal back gesture that works across apps like Android has? It makes the phone so clunkly and slow.

My guess is models are constantly tweaked behind the scenes to adjust to available resources, steer people to other models, accommodate usage on other models, try out optimizations, etc.

Performance seems to vary like the weather.

I think you also likely have three letter agencies involved heavily now. The NSA is, without a doubt, policing what can be offered to the public and ensuring what the NSA has access to is a step or two beyond what is public.

This is especially appropriate for HN and other software engineering forums where embedded/systems, frontend, backend, imperitive, functional, etc programmers all constantly yell at each other about whether the elephant is a rope or a snake or a tree.

It's easy to think your experience encompasses all of "software" and give definitive advice to others who work in a vastly different space than you do.

> One text tells of a fever epidemic that struck the infant daughter of the king. She was still a nursing baby when she became ill. She never recovered from the fever and her health declined precipitously until she passed away.

Wow, the infant daughter was nursing a baby? Were the Hittites like aphids which can be pregnant while still in the womb?

As much as I hate AI slop, sometimes I think people are better off leaving writing to robots.

I lean towards a hybrid review process where humans accept their limitations, focus what they're good on(higher level concepts and architecture of the proposed change), and let the LLMs do the rest.

Doing a line by line review as a human is silly now.

Think of the docs as a cache. You're saving tokens by starting with a map of the code. Why try to figure it out each time?

Reducing which risk? The risk that the models of big American companies cause harm? What if they abide by some rules while models of others remain unfettered? That also carries risk. I appreciate the wish to have tame AI which only does good things but I'm afraid we're already beyond that.

Again you're shifting your arguments and not addressing your initial response.

It's frequent for SWEs to make blanket statements with considering the vast space of issues other people face that they don't have experience with or awareness of. Anyway, I'm not going to tell you what you do or don't need, only what worked and didn't for me.

In my codebase it is difficult to get agreement on comments and documentation so rather than rely on it I adapted. One of the first things I did when I succumbed to agentic development was to point codex at the code and ask it to generate a high level description of where important files, such as our public API, reside, what the hierarchy is, what the code does, etc. In my case, this level of documentation is fairly static if I avoid implementation details. So now I have a handful of agent files in my tree and it seems to save quite a few tokens and improve my results. I frequently have other devs ask me how I get such good results when doing agentic reviews of their changes(always my first step now before I start my human review). I also include instructions in the agents files instructing the agent to maintain the agent files if any relevant changes are made. It seems to work quite well for me.

So you want to regulate the sale of GPUs? How are you going to do that and why would it be more effective than currently failing measures to regulate nearly everything else?

Good examples. We are currently failing at all of that.

They very likely will via shell companies in jurisdictions outside the west. Are you suggesting we go to war to stop them? The massive datacenters are needed to serve models to millions. Criminal orgs don't need massive data centers anyway.

As Bruce Schneier recently discussed, law and tax law are code, just like source code. LLMs are great at finding holes in them. Illicit organizations looking to launder funds are most certainly interested in what AI can do for them.

Ok but this response has nothing to do with your other comment. What exactly were you trying to say?

So you cede the frontier of human progress to illicit organizations and other nations?

Nuclear weapons take a bit more work than doing math.

So you are contending that individuals cannot run advanced models? What brought you to that conclusion?

Secondly, are you contending that progress in model efficiency and hardware just stops at whatever level you think is sufficient to prevent individuals or organizations from acquiring sufficient resources to run advanced models?

Humanity has discovered a way to create a form of intelligence using math. This knowledge is not going back in the box.

When did chip demand skyrocket?

How long does it take to ramp up capacity?

Eventually... But it is materially relevant if that happens in 2 years or 10.

While I think SWEs(yeah, not HW/chip but that's not my field) are cooked in 5 years, I think we'll be quite busy in the meantime fixing all the bugs that AI finds.

Ask chatgpt or Gemini with reasoning enabled. It fixes a lot of issues.

Until Google wants to pay for reasoning for everyone their AI results will continue to be terrible. In my experience, reasoning fixes a great many of the sorts of hallucinations and falsehoods I've received from googling.

Lol sure dude.

We're uh.. we're a well known and widely used piece of software. There is an insanely large amount of testing that needs to go in to each change across many platforms and configurations and we have a lot of devs hammering that system with changes to test. Even worse now because of AI...

Code debt.

Software engineering is possible but largely a myth in practice.