VeninVidiaVicii

I run mine on an abacus.

It's really about hamstringing the AIs so they can't write crap. Writing code is not a problem anymore, so anyone with an idea can write a script to do what they want. But if they try to connect two ideas together, now they have a data modeling problem. This is where everything seems to fail with AI coding (largely because the original author had the idea piecemeal).

The problem with Claudish and this README is that the whole thing is vapid text adding up to nothing in particular. When AI takes over a project like this it really has no goal.

> Repeated regions add no iteration field to endpoint types, descriptor rows

So what? Is this a goal or an admission? Is this something you implemented or what was done before?

Wow I missed the forest for the trees!

This is wild, nowhere was mentioned the cause of deaths?

Every time I leave my phone in the other room to “finally get some work done”, please enter this goddamn number we sent to your SMS, and I close my laptop.

Maybe you haven’t seen enough coworkers send you pages and pages of slop.

I find the questions are not clearly asked and somehow half baked as caveats toward the middle end of what it’s vomiting.

“One thing I deliberately didn’t touch” — about half the time this is something completely irrelevant or something that is actually the target of whatever you’re working on, and the shakespearean prose it says around this phrase is a “question” it has.

Everything you’re saying is how I feel as a native English speaker and it drives me absolutely nuts. People in airports are obsessed with telling you what you can’t do.

The one thing that kind of works for me is, “Well, what should I do?” when they bark orders about what I can’t do.

“You can’t have your boarding pass in your hand!”, when you’re in the x-ray. “Where should I put it now?”

Oh well, it turns out I actually can have it in my hand. Thanks.

This is the problem with commercial AI and the way our minds work; it writes garbage and we’re trained to think we’re stupid because we can’t understand it.

I've definitely wowed people with what I've built, and some of those people are investors... but actual revenue, no.

Yeah I agree, but the amount of resources I’ve used to vibe code is certainly way beyond what I’ve paid for it.

I suspect the hype will play itself out once the entire system of LLM-induced self gratification can’t sustain itself economically.

But also what is the evidence that something only AI can understand even “matters” or makes sense? I’m increasingly convinced commercial AI is exploiting our logical blind spot to be spoken to authoritatively.

Weird how something was done about that though

You’re missing the point. It seems like you’re saying how things “generally” are, but not how they legally should play out. For instance, among my lawyer friends, they insist that drug-sniffing dogs should require a warrant as well, and a few have said they’d happily take a case like this pro-bono to start putting the goalposts where they belong.

Kids shouldn’t be aiming for well-rounded at all; that’s a classic misread of what selections committees are looking for. Our PhD selections chair was explicit about wanting a well-rounded class full of students with great depth.

Frankly reading about students with six hobbies and after school activities and volunteering is exhausting. I can’t emphasize this enough: that kind of grind is wasteful, and makes you look just like everyone else.

It seems we are unfamiliar with sarcasm.

Ah ol smoop

Anything the CEO or CTO say to me over Slack, when I ask what the heck they’re talking about, it takes a while for an answer. Then they usually respond that they changed their mind. They can’t even have a semblance of a discussion anymore without consulting AI.

I suppose the argument is in reverse. They are so ubiquitous, they don’t really have to be good anymore to capture the market.

You wouldn’t steal a Claude!

Yeah but look how much there is! Aren’t you impressed?

Hard to say what caused what, but the internet seems to mistake verbosity for authority, and so does AI.

“Find” in the sense of “find me the man and I’ll find you the crime”.

Yep. I was trying to put together some literature from authors who were imprisoned in the Bastille, and had a similar experience, which was absolutely infuriating.

I’m pretty sure they mean perceptible complexity at the level of the human eye. Of course, everything has quarks and leptons in infinitely complex patterning.

I wonder if clues like this will be what are written in history books as the beginning of the bubble bursting.

Language is just a shortcut to logic. LLMs don’t seem to have the capacity to logic, they just pattern match. LLMs seem conscious because they are pattern matching against all of human written cognition.

Yeah dealing with this now, where my CTO is shipping features that are producing plausible results but just wrong. So, now I gotta spend all day explaining the math behind certain features to her, and she copies and pastes it to Claude.