jfreds

Inviting a reporter from the Atlantic to your signal chat where you coordinate military plans has nothing to do with government being too big

This is true. What are the implications of that?

I get this at work, frequently.

“Oh, cursor wrote that.”

If it made it into your pull request, YOU wrote it, and it it’ll be part of your performance review. Cursor doesn’t have a performance review. Simple as

> automated review tools that publish comments without human review are not allowed

This seems like a curious choice. At my company we have both Gemini and cursor (I’m not sure which model under the hood on that) review agents available. Both frequently raise legitimate points. Im sure they’re abusable, I just haven’t seen it

Citation? Not saying you’re wrong but my time in defense left me very much with the opposite opinion (radar target acquisitions had to be approved by a human, always)

Your points about misquotes and language troubles are very valid and interesting. But a word of caution on your prompt: you’re asking a lot of the word “analyze” here; if the LLM responded that the thread had 15 comments by 10 unique authors, and a total of 2000 characters, I would classify that as a completely satisfactory answer (assuming the figures were correct) based on the query

Yeah this seems like an obvious solution, which axon ought to be on board with since it protects them.

When juniors use the excuse “oh Claude wrote that” in a PR, I tell them if the PR has their name on it, they wrote it - and their PRs are part of their performance review. This is no different

Short answer is yes. Not only is it more token-friendly and potentially lower latency, it also prevents weird context issues like forgetting Rules, compacting your conversation and missing relevant details, etc.

Having gone though exactly this exercise recently comparing a homegrown vector db against Qdrant, I’m wholeheartedly in agreement that getting a working solution FAST, and then spending a decent amount of time interrogating it (with help of LLM), is my favorite learning pattern

The problem with this whole argument is that you can easily reframe the definition of the activity to suit any specific agenda.

Going with the swimming analogy: If you’re attempting to cross a pool, you can just dead man’s float and eventually you’ll get there. If you’re attempting to cross it using crawl stroke you can do slow slowly and lazily. If your goal is to build Olympic tier swimming fitness, well then you need to pull exactly as hard as you need to to optimally build muscle / neural pathways / whatever.

By the way, overgripping is proven to boost effective strength. Next time you’re struggling for a last rep, try squeezing the bar harder.

My point isn’t that we shouldn’t burn ourselves out, it’s just that it’s very hard to know what the amount of energy an activity actually “requires” is

> they remove all nuance

Said in a sweeping generalization with zero sense of irony :D

I agree wholeheartedly. As for the why do craftsmen care so much about the factory instead of the product, I believe the answer is pride. It’s a bitter pill to swallow, but writing and shipping a hack is sometimes the high road

Took me way too long to learn this. It still makes me sad to leave projects “imperfect” and not fiddle in my free time sometimes

Maybe it goes without saying, but if you aren’t good at managing -credit-, you aren’t good at managing -money-, period.

All your savings will evaporate when you can’t get a good mortgage rate. That’s not good money management

I was homeschooled until high school. I couldn’t agree with you more. The value that the socialization the public school offers is underestimated.

Learning activities with other homeschooled kids is ok but not enough. A tight-knit neighborhood of friends is huge, but not enough. You need to develop a thick skin and a sense of self-assurance.

I have no counterfactual of course, but I think much of the social anxiety I’ve had to unlearn as a young adult came from homeschooling. And I had great circumstances