[deleted]
Show HN: Phage Explorer
21–30 of 39 posts
Re: Show HN: Phage Explorer
#22At least put a big warning in your introduction box that highlights that those data might be invalid because you are not an expert in this topic. Let the use acknowledge this before continuing.
Re: Show HN: Phage Explorer
#23What used to be a life time project that would inspire awe and respect and make OP an instant hire for most managers is now a fun 1-week stunt that makes you go “cool, how many tokens?” Of course, the result is cool and maybe even useful (I wouldn’t dare say _correct_, being ignorant of the topic), but I cannot help but think that this would have been tremendously better if done the old (proper?) way. Also, I suspect…
Yeah but the choice isn't "do I spend two weeks on this, or do I spend a lifetime?". It's "I have two weeks, do I spend them making the whole thing with AI, or 5% of it without?".
If it's inaccurate it's worthless anyhow.
It's absolutely no issue to build all the technical and design stuff with AI, but science facts must be science facts and not just AI gibberish presented like facts.
What's the benefit of presenting not trustworthy data?
Re: Show HN: Phage Explorer
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah but the choice isn't "do I spend two weeks on this, or do I spend a lifetime?". It's "I have two weeks, do I spend them making the whole thing with AI, or 5% of it without?".
If it's inaccurate it's worthless anyhow. It's absolutely no issue to build all the technical and design stuff with AI, but science facts must be science facts and not just AI gibberish presented like facts. What's the benefit of presenting not trustworthy data?
That's an entirely different argument, though. Let's not move the goalposts.
Re: Show HN: Phage Explorer
#25What used to be a life time project that would inspire awe and respect and make OP an instant hire for most managers is now a fun 1-week stunt that makes you go “cool, how many tokens?” Of course, the result is cool and maybe even useful (I wouldn’t dare say _correct_, being ignorant of the topic), but I cannot help but think that this would have been tremendously better if done the old (proper?) way. Also, I suspect…
Yeah but the choice isn't "do I spend two weeks on this, or do I spend a lifetime?". It's "I have two weeks, do I spend them making the whole thing with AI, or 5% of it without?".
It must be me getting old, but definitely 5% of it without, if your goal is to learn something. 5% of thinking about a hard problem is more valuable than 100% of letting it being done by someone else.
Especially when the value of the end result is close to zero, since it is now so easy to do and replicate.
Re: Show HN: Phage Explorer
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah but the choice isn't "do I spend two weeks on this, or do I spend a lifetime?". It's "I have two weeks, do I spend them making the whole thing with AI, or 5% of it without?".
It must be me getting old, but definitely 5% of it without, if your goal is to learn something. 5% of thinking about a hard problem is more valuable than 100% of letting it being done by someone else. Especially when the value of the end result is close to zero, since it is now so easy to do and replicate.
Eh, my goal is to make something, personally.
Re: Show HN: Phage Explorer
#27It looks nice but very "LLMsy". I liked that it specifically annotates "Lytic" vs "Lysogenic" categorization for phages. Important in terms of virome analysis.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11097211/
Re: Show HN: Phage Explorer
#28Very good idea and very interesting. Great use of AI. The next step in this project, if you were funded, would be to have human experts double check the accuracy of the information and images.
Since this isn't funded, you could have a frontier model evaluate all the information for inaccuracies and fix them it can't find any. Then have another frontier model do the same. Then go back to the first model and see if it finds any inaccuracies.
Keep at it. You are doing a great job, but there is more work to be done before you can productionize it.
Re: Show HN: Phage Explorer
#29[dead]
Re: Show HN: Phage Explorer
#30This is so riddled with inaccuracies that I can spot them immediately despite not being a phage biologist. For example, the PhiX image has a DNA with about 20 base pairs - wildly not to scale. M13 is also wildly scaled, and it clearly has a double stranded DNA which is labeled as single stranded. What the hell is this amino acid view? This is not how genes work at all. This is biology 101 and it's completely wrong. W…
Yeah we're all quickly figuring out that LLMs shift the engineering work from computer science to bullshit detection. You basically have to become that guy on the Internet who's always trying to prove you wrong when working with Claude Code. Otherwise you're going to build yourself a false reality and get skewered if you try to share it. I mean I've done it myself, because we're so used to blindly trusting the things other people built, that we forget we're the ones building it. Nothing in life is free.