afspear

Is being concerned that this article is obviously AI slop matter anymore?

I feel like that blog post was actually written by AI. I wondered what words were being nudged, and what effect it was having on me, the reader.

What would be super cool is if this dumb zone could be quantified and surfaced to the user. I've noticed that copilot now has a little circle graph that indicates context use percentage and it changes color based on percentage. I'll bet these are very naive metrics on used tokens vs context availability. I wonder if there could be meta data streamed or sent along with the tokens that could show that you've entered the dumb zone.

https://github.com/calef/us-federal-tax-assistant-skill is the link to the skill that came out of this work.

The opening of this show feels very relevant today. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucSUs3adMQ8

The sec. vulns just keep coming: https://www.wiz.io/blog/exposed-moltbook-database-reveals-mi...

Meanwhile I'm over here reducing my ADO ticket time estimates by 75%.

Maybe we should find other datasets not generated by humans to train LLMs?

I never made this journey, but I have ended up with the same AI coding stack.

At this point, I'm not so concerned about the interface (claude code vs github copilot, etc, etc.) Sometimes I need to use one over the other because of...reasons. But I do seem to be coming back to the Anthropic models in particular. My rule of thumb is turning out to be:

1)How long is this taking? 2)Was it the right solution?

The first is pretty easy to get a feel for. The second is also a feeling I'm developing over time, but I am starting to trust the Anthropic models for all my coding.

The article says "Consider the implications if ChatGPT started saying “I don’t know” to even 30% of queries – a conservative estimate based on the paper’s analysis of factual uncertainty in training data. Users accustomed to receiving confident answers to virtually any question would likely abandon such systems rapidly." Maybe. But not me. I would trust it more, and rely on it even more. I can work with someone who says I don't know but is super smart. And I'll bet more people will do the same. Over time, the system may enjoy the rewards of communal trust over and above what it currently enjoys. However, over the long time, this may lead to a more dystopian version of what might happen currently. We may all give blind trust because we all trust it. Given a decade or half of that, and then the system going wrong....Yikes. We have to grapple with the ongoing advice that "ChatGPT can make mistakes. Check important info." And we do. Because we have to, or at least some of us do. And that is a good thing.

To be fair, it's a disposable vape.