riazrizvi

In my career travels I am yet to find any professional group crow as confidently from on top of a hollow position as software developers. I think it has to do with daily operating from inside a deterministic environment, it gets projected out into human situations.

You go first.

Direct specific evidence to back up the criticism that these guys are not looking at data and just making up dumb rules to reduce their customer base.

Within this is a further heartening reassurance that I chose a profession I will be able to do until my dying day. But at 55 I see my safest option is my own business where some higher up doesn't take me off a role I improve to give it to someone they know.

Defend my criticism of ignorance of circumstances by pointing out some similar vague notion of how I spent 15 years working in banks even though they are not this bank and this situation? No thanks.

> they don't understand what they are talking about

Even though the banks' policies are driven by incident responses and real data, whereas your position is presented on theory.

Love these. Visual comedy. I could say "Person trying to persuade bus driver to let them on at a traffic stop" but without the specific instance that captures it for ppl, there's no joke being communicated.

Claude is an npm package, a terminal app. A 1/2 million lines that probably translates to around 50-100k lines of original thinking. A pair of industrious devs (or one inspired maniac) could write about 100k in the first year of a fresh project.

Computation though is still an economic problem of applying compute resources to information processing problems. Regexes that work are much more efficient than a massive LLM inference.

I wonder how much dog shit has crept into their codebase by this point. Another company might dogfood their product but Anthropic is so heavily marketing oriented, I doubt this is driven by the desire to improve the product as much as it is by the desire to pad out usage numbers and create shareable stories. No matter the consequences. I bet $1 it sucks to be a good engineer in their software effort.

I saw emergency and I immediately thought in case I couldn't access online docs or get my coding/platform questions answered day-to-day.

Apocalypse emergency I don't need help on. My crisis brain has collected more than enough info and capabilities over the decades.

This is an example of the power of constraints that David Epstein talks about on Youtube (@DavidEpsteinAuthor) and in his book (Inside The Box).

Only an audience of software developers would find that first statement insightful. The rest of the world generally understands that expression is a product of the human performing the execution of that expression.

That mowed lawn. That email message. That meal they made for you. They are windows into some specific humans.

Are you? Not me. $19.9mm annual revenue would do fine for me. If anyone else is considering opening up their thing with a clause like this, you've got a friendly supporter in me.

Feels right and sustainable, ballpark.

This is a strong application of LLMs IMO. They are idea machines. Historical ways of thinking give us different paths to explore the world through.

Good to know.

As an alternative to Gmail can I recommend Hotmail? I recently created an account and a nice feature is that all new email goes into the Junk folder by default. It was obviously designed by a misanthropic hermit, but the benefit is that your emails drop to almost zero. It's a bit of a bummer if you had a job opportunity or a friend tries to contact you, but on the other hand, fewer distractions.

Crazy times.

Very expensive and valuable information to come by, thanks for sharing.

I noticed that. I'm getting ads now based on conversations. I'm okay with it. I don't mind relevant ads.

Because money?

Ask me another.

Very helpful thanks.

I don't get this. Use cash like me and a bunch of us if you don't want to play the game. Or a debit card. Otherwise it's just an extra game. Extra games are choice. Choice is good.

No. It's a shorthand for contextual bias. The context is the tiny window of the statistic. When it's applied to a real world situation, ppl promote the 'unbiasedness' into a real situation that isn't constrained by it.

Bias cannot be avoided in any information, because it's always a position of what is relevant and in what presented order. The only unbiased thing is nature itself in its immediate instantaneous totality.

There is no position lacking bias. The question of bias against me is a political position not an epistemological problem that can be eliminated. I see authors that are unaware of things like context and relativity.

When ppl say there is an absolute truth that we need to stick to, they are slipping in a totalitarian political position and calling it truth. It runs against the whole premise of nature and life, which has rested for 4 billion years on: Alternative competing positions, seeing which one works best.

I stopped at the daft-to-me premise:

> As large language models (LLMs) are adopted into frameworks that grant them the capacity to make real decisions, it is increasingly important to ensure that they are unbiased

Come on. Things still break. Technology isn't _that_ mature.

Okay step away from the waving hands and read the source material.

Really? It spins up too many reasoners on the back-end and triggers a safeguard? Fascinating.

Phew. It wasn't because of something I said. Lots of ppl are impacted.

Fascinating. So it seems to have been used for parasitic and fungal skin treatments, angina, and to induce miscarriage. With no doubt a very narrow band of error.