ithkuil

I guess it depends on how you parse "the future of X".

To me it sounds like "This is how I imagine the future of X", i.e. a preview of a possible future.

But at the same time we all build things on top of other things and rely on complex supply chains. That's also a form of collaboration

It clearly says in the article that this is just a demo

Explains the Fermi paradox

Well, that remains to be seen

For me the proof that we do indeed have and use a technical dialect of English in this field lies in the simple observation that no matter how much praise I get at work for how good my English, that doesn't map at all with my ability (or lack thereof) to converse fluently with the random Joe on the street of an English speaking country

It's not necessarily just the terseness. Terseness might be a selling point for people who have already invested in training themselves to be fluent with programming languages and the associated ecosystem of tooling.

But there is an entire cohort of people who can think about specifying systems but lack the training to sdo so so using the current methods and see a lower barrier to entry in the natural language.

That doesn't mean the LLM is going to think on your behalf (although there is also a little bit of that involved and that's where stuff gets confusing) but it surely provides a completely different interface for turning your ideas into working machinery

A form of context engineering

And influence he got. Gutting it was an act of influence and carried the message he wanted to carry across quite perfectly

Thanks! "thinking resistors" will be the name of my future AI-punk band.

The problem is that I do understand you! I do feel exactly as you do! My lizard brain would like to do all sorts of horrible retaliations to those people who performed such abhorrent acts. I get it, it's natural.

But I think that society should prevent this kind of basic instinctive response to become the way that we collectively handled those monstrosities, mainly because those punishments will be abused against innocent scapegoats.

Indeed, you need both!

But documentation should not go too deep in the "how" otherwise it risks telling a lie after a while as the code changes but the documentation lags.

I'm pretty sure the vast majority of those convicted are rightfully convicted.

But paint me skeptical as to whether increased use of technology can actually improve the reliability of the proofs.

Imagine a world where deep fakes are much better quality but our system hasn't yet caught up to take that into proper consideration etc.

Serving for life is already a big deal as punishment goes. I'm just asking to not have experimental medical experiments on people. I'm not saying they should walk free

I consider the risk of wrongful conviction to be an argument against the death penalty and for the very same reason I'm against performing any kind of inhuman treatment of them (which might be worse than death).

Even if 95% would totally deserve it, I don't think we should just accept that on average 4 innocent people every year are just treated as subhumans just so we can unleash our wrath over those who did truly horrible things.

Death is still a better option rather than being used as lab rat

What is "team DST"? Those who want permanent DST or those who want to do things as they are where DST is on for half of the year?

Being a skeptic doesn't make one an irrational hater (surely such people exist and might be noisy and taint all skeptics as such)

I am learning how to make good use of agent assisted engineering and while I'm positively impressed with many things they can do, I'm definitely skeptical about various aspects of the process:

1. Quality of the results 2. Maintainability 3. Overall saved time

There are still open problems because we're introducing a significant change in the tooling while keeping the rest of the process unchanged (often for good reasons). For example consider the imbalance in the code review cost (some people produce tons of changes and the rest of the team is drowned by the review burden)

This new wave of tooling is undoubtedly going to transform the way that software is developed, but I think jump too quickly to the conclusion that they already figured out how exactly is that going to look like

I'm terrified at the idea that society will select the crazies and the violent instead. I wonder why I think that

If Congress declared an actual war and if they declared to use war time laws to force a private company to comply with the war effort, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

What happened was different: a private company decided to enforce some terms, as they can do during peace time and they have been bullied in a way that is disgraceful precisely because it didn't happen during war time nor it has been done using the existing laws around that.

What is the purpose of having laws in the first place if we accept that the government can rule by intimidation?

I think the relevant problem of rust to this thread is not that it's unstable (it isn't unstable!) but it can be argued that it's a moving target

There is "engineering, the discipline", "engineering, the process", "engineering, the vocation, the career path, the learning process" (and many more). Each hat an engineer wears (based on age and context (has its peculiar aspects which might appear to be contradictory with other phases and not all people walked and thrived through all the phases.

Fwiw I'm having a good experience with a skill using Jira CLI directly. My first attempt using a Jira MCP failed. I didn't invest much time debugging the MCP issues, I just switched to the skill and it just worked.

Yes occasionally Claude uses the wrong flag and it has to retry the command (I didn't even bother to fork the skill and add some memory about the bad flag) but in practice it just works

This remains a problem for the personal account though (arguably what "primary account" meant in GP)

Nothing is contradictory if you don't think

Is it possible there are mine fields that are not known yet?

Poe's law?

(I'm saying this with love)

"if you know one forth, you know one forth"

have you find a way to make claude emit the OSC hyperlink escapes when using SwiftTerm?

Has anybody implemented a Human Control Protocol, where a model can interact with a human as if it was a tool call?

This is uncharted territory and very interesting.. We humans live with a strong requirement of reputation management which shapes the way that we do things.

Once we have agents openly do things on our behalf but not in our voice, it will be interesting to see how of subpar performance or bad etiquette gets accepted just because agents don't have an individual personal reputation to maintain