Viewing profile — TomasBM

That depends on the model and the toolkit it uses. In my experience from using Claude Code (Max, Opus 4.5+) intensely for the past six months, I maybe had 3 instances where the imp…

This is actually a good idea. I mean, not sure if everyone wants that for their project, and there will surely be plenty of trade-offs. But it would be a very good compromise: You …

Isn't that what I'm already doing? I assume that the author believes that he's right often enough to argue his position(s), but feels dejected without being proven wrong at the end…

I like this - thanks for sharing!

Definite agree on having human-based redundant systems. But I think the point the parent commenter made is: if there's not a functional difference in the result (i.e., job satisfie…

Other than the obvious, self-reflective question that the author doesn't pose - "what if I'm the one who's wrong?" - I think it's worth arguing if the conditions are right. Because…

Seems like this policy would apply pretty well regardless of who/what generated the code.

Well, unless you needed those million copies for whatever reason, that is an example of spam or denial-of-service , regardless of how it's generated. And I'm not disagreeing - it i…

Good point. Even if you submit small, verifiable and readable changes, you can still overload the review process by submitting too many of them (e.g., 100s of PRs). But I'd argue t…

I think that's completely fair. There are also plenty of valid personal reasons for refusing to generate code with AI - learning-by-doing and ownership of the result being the main…

If you have some requirements/specifications, and the piece of code fits them, then it runs. Alternatively, if you have some vague idea [1] about what you expect to see/have, and t…

Current narrative where? I don't see this narrative being more prominent than the "AI won't be displacing jobs because things worked out in the past" counternarrative . For example…

Interesting initiative. What are the guiding reasons behind these lists? I can't think of a functional reason for a no-AI policy: if it runs, it runs, regardless of who or what mad…

It's a fair policy. Getting those verbose, AI-authored walls of text is very annoying, especially when you're expected to thoroughly review it. It's like a denial-of-service attack…

Actually, the replication crisis shows how difficult (or underinvested) the process of reviewing is. Removing this (often very basic) peer review doesn't somehow fix the problem. T…

> I had even proposed and implemented an integration for arXiv Labs that got accepted, but then never merged. I should follow up on that... You definitely should - looks like what …

ArXiv is a good complement to the modern peer review, IMO. As long as someone "vouches" for you, and you adhere to its minimal standards, you're able to post a paper. Other readers…

Unfortunately, I don't think systems thinking alone would help much. One could present the case in favor of Internet age verification to the nth-order effects, while downplaying th…

Why is it psychosis and not lower standards ? While I can understand being skeptical of non-experts' claims that such answers are enough, I don't understand why you call it "psycho…

I'm not always a fan of the squiggles, but I can appreciate the UI pattern. It's definitely one of the more intuitive and recognizable visual markers for "something's wrong with th…

Isn't that bias just legitimized by having culture fitness criteria in hiring?

Your scenario is confusingly formulated, but it ultimately deals with moral risk. If you suspect that it's fraud, you should seriously consider whether you want to be a part of it,…

Do you have a specific example of a wasteful STEM research project that was cut? My (perhaps wrong) impression was that wastefulness was given as the reason for making the cuts, bu…

No disagreement there. I would even argue that anything that enables broad-area targetting since the invention of the Maxim machine gun and artillery would qualify as a weapon of m…

You're interpreting the claims more strongly than they were presented, IMO. > One of its premises is that The Rich are some cohesive group There doesn't have to be a fully cohesive…