241–250 of 268 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://x.com/vasuman/status/2053956365052240263 > whoever spent $600 on Anthropic last night, great job leveraging Al! But to the person who spent $23 on Uber Eats please remember our limit for food is $20 per meal
> Fake because no uber eats order is under 30$
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your argument that bad processes can't possibly be improved is contradicted by all of recorded history.
That's because you've misconstrued my argument. My argument is that everything is a tradeoff and while management can be MORE conscious, there's a certain level of bullshit that's inevitable. But more specifically ICs tend to want to say "if you just let me do what I know is right it would be fine." That's a trade-off, too, though. That solution means a lot of people will be messing around due to no accountability.
If setting the actual goal you want to achieve as a manager, and then trusting employees to allocate their focus accordingly, you will absolutely have people faffing off (as likely can't be avoided), but at least those who don't will optimize towards what works according to their actual expertise at least.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you are using subagents for asynchronous work, you can burn through 300 requests in a workday easily.
Copilot didn't charge for subagents. You could do an insane amount of work with dozens of subagents with a single request and a deep enough prompt to kick it off. I setup entire virtual teams (Dev, QA, product, reviewers etc with the initiating model just acting as the agent manager to keep it's context minimal) to one-shot some stuff and it kept churning and making progress. Those days are just about over with the c…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your comment is the equivalent of stating, that Jeff Bezos and Andy Jassy, do not really know their employees are carrying around urine bottles.
Mmm, no, I don’t think it’s equivalent. I think they know that if you make the work hard, some employees will have trouble keeping up and will do things like peeing in bottles. And they’re OK with that, because they think there are enough people who can keep up that they can push the weaker people out. I think they believe that the peeing in bottle is relatively rare. I’m unsure whether that’s right or not. It’s been…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Human nature? In the early nineties, it was common for experienced electrical engineers to keep on using schematic entry digital design and look down on RTL and synthesis tools, despite that fact the latter was already way more productive. At some point, management had to put their foot down and force everyone to switch to using synthesis. It's not unreasonable to assume that many people are set in their ways and unw…
It is completely unreasonable to assume that. Tech people are so hungry for productivity gains that they regularly will defy management forbidding them from using a tool, because the tool is so good they feel they have to have it. If LLMs truly are as good as their proponents say, engineers will use them even if management outright forbade it. The fact that people aren't using them, and have to be forced, is extremel…
Surely you can't argue in good faith today that LLMs aren't useful? It was a valid argument a year ago, but the latest models are absolutely useful at solving whole classes of problems.
They're not perfect, need to be carefully monitored, can cause weird gambling like dopamine rushes and can cause lazy development habits to creep in. But none of those things negate the fact that, in many situations, they are useful.
The fact that management signed off on measuring AI use through token usage shows how incompetent management really is, including in allegedly technical conmpanies like Amazon. Tokenmaxxing was an entirely expected and rational response. IOW You measure employees in stupid ways, you're going to get stupid behaviour as a consequence.
The fact that management signed off on measuring AI use through token usage shows how incompetent management really is, including in allegedly technical conmpanies like Amazon. Tokenmaxxing was an entirely expected and rational response. IOW You measure employees in stupid ways, you're going to get stupid behaviour as a consequence.
The fact that management signed off on measuring AI use through token usage shows how incompetent management really is, including in allegedly technical conmpanies like Amazon. Tokenmaxxing was an entirely expected and rational response. IOW You measure employees in stupid ways, you're going to get stupid behaviour as a consequence.