Probably just a model that was trained on high code bases, tuned to find security breaches and bugs by being "smart" enough to actually test the code by itself / manually going through the app / website feels easy for Fable so Mythos is just a better version.
What it feels like to work with Mythos
241–250 of 337 posts
Re: What it feels like to work with Mythos
#242Desperate to know what the prompt for the poem is. The idea of it felt familiar so I went down the rabbit hole and found: 14 years ago, a poem on reddit [ https://www.reddit.com/r/RedditDayOf/comments/tjjw2/may_12_a... ] . Nowhere near the length of the one the author shared but the same idea. > This is from "The Cyberiad", a collection of science-fiction fairy tales by Polish author Stanislaw Lem ... In one of the s…
What's fascinating is that this is the difficulty of English translation -- which uses a different start letter and different words than the Polish one:
Cyprian cyberotoman, cynik, ceniąc czule
Czarnej córy cesarskiej cud ciemnego ciała,
Ciągle cytrą czarował. Czerwieniała cała,
Cicha, co-dzień czekała, cierpiała, czuwała...
... Cyprian ciotkę całuje, cisnąwszy czarnulę!!
Re: What it feels like to work with Mythos
#243Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm happy to discuss arguments if you want to add any?
The only thing they’ve overtaken is arguably batteries, and even that is questionable if the quality is as good as Korean manufacturers. I think it’s more likely that the Chinese chip industry overtaking competitors will remain like nuclear fusion, forever “just 5 years away”
The best batteries are currently from CATL. No one in the industry is doubting this.
Huawei just showed LogicFolding and have a roadmap for 1.4 nanometer by 2031; SMIC is going for 5nm.
And all of this WITHOUT EUV.
Re: What it feels like to work with Mythos
#244on the places I've checked, mostly Paris to places in Ireland or Britain, the times are off by an order of magnitude
looks nice but deeply flawed
classic LLM output
Re: What it feels like to work with Mythos
#245Earlier quoted context omitted.
Welcome to every LLM discussion in the past 2 years or so. When asked for anything of substance, we're faced with a barrage of "but humans aren't good at this too!" Very few quantifiable evidence and lots of pure rhetoric.
I’ve seen this pattern again and again, and I don’t bother replying. There’s also the “strong statement, and when you contradict it, they point out some particular circumstances that no one cares about”.
I think a lot of us have stopped talking to each other about this. I see it the other way round to you. I see constant scepticism and doubt that LLMs can build anything useful, and whenever provided with examples, the goalposts just move.
And at my own firm, I think every developer is generating most of their code using agentic coding. We're still sceptical enough that we are doing the usual heavy handed human review process, so we're not seeing a huge speed up in delivery times, but we are seeing a volume increase. That is because writing the changes and raising the PRs is much faster, but also a lot of boring admin and support work is now mostly done by LLMs. Reports of instability, vague client requests, etc? Throw the LLM at them and it usually figure it out why I continue to engineer.
So I know, first hand, that these things are very good. I also know second and third hand that pretty much every fintech in the industry is as heavily using agentic coding as we are.
And then I come to HN or reddit and I see people telling us that they cannot write decent production code, and this is just wrong. This isn't opinion wrong, it is objectively wrong. Any fintech that wants to keep up will tell you this.
I can't speak for other industries but I can't imagine they're different.
So, I'm not sure what to conclude from this. I don't want to be uncharitable, but when HN/reddit posts just don't match the reality I see for myself, I have no choice but to categorise them as being emotionally driven to stick to a particular narrative, and so I can dismiss them.
Re: What it feels like to work with Mythos
#246Earlier quoted context omitted.
You've missed the point.
The point doesn’t seem to have been thought through.
The point is, if road engineers changed their process and materials, and to you it felt like driving on the same road, with the same wear and tear and potholes, you wouldn't even notice.
If AIs can generate code that looks ridiculous to humans but over time has the correct performance, the correct behaviour, no-one outside of software engineers will know or care.
Re: What it feels like to work with Mythos
#247Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I think the entire definition of technical debt has changed. I’ve been sceptical of these tools and still approach their output with caution. This very well summarizes my current thinking on the subject as well. And most of my career has been playing the role of technical debt nazi. Much to the detriment of my earning potential. Does AI make incredibly inefficient code most of the time? Yup. But it does it at light…
> Does AI make incredibly inefficient code most of the time? Yup. But it does it at lightspeed with minimal effort. This hits the nail in the head. Detractors often hang on to examples of coding assistants making mistakes or output subpar code, but they somehow miss the fact that coding assistants can also be prompted again and refactor whole swaths of code just as fast as they introduce oopsies. This means that the…
The problem is that this approach is not sustainable. Errors compound. The cost to fix one issue might seem small at first, but over a stretch of time all these "oopsies" become architectural spaghetti that can only be fixed with a complete rewrite, which will certainly become more expensive than getting the code "organically" developed.
The only way I see AI coding working in the long run is if we go back to a Waterfall/BDUF process and having actual engineering. Let engineers really own the architecture. Enforce that any new feature - no matter how small - to be specced out with complete sequence diagrams. Ensure that every new software package needs to be put on an UML component diagram for the team to review and see each addition interacts with the whole system, etc.
If we do that, then we can just give all the documents to a coding agent and say "go ahead and implement this" with a minimal amount of confidence. But in doing this, I bet we will realize the following:
- the "effort" has never been about writing code itself. The code is just the material manifest of all the thought that went to think over a solution into the problems that the product is attempting to solve.
- we will likely be better off by using code generation tools (i.e, UML-to-code) and a "weak" LLM (than can run locally) than by playing the token lottery at the Anthropic Casino.Re: What it feels like to work with Mythos
#248Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does it matter to the people requesting the software if it acts in the way they expect?
We've lived in a software bubble for so long, most software engineers have completely forgotten that the purpose of (most) software is to solve a problem . If that problem solves the problem well and reliably it doesn't matter the quality of the code. In fact, that's the entire reason we care about "quality code", because we assume that quality code is code that does what you expect well and consistently. I say this…
Exactly. Quality of code is a programming invention to make it easier to write and maintain correctly functioning applications.
That is the entire purpose of "quality of code".
If the end user experiences a correctly performing application, now, and in the future, they don't care at all what the code looks like.
AIs could resort to a single global array of primitives and forget all about functions, and just use gotos if it helped them (it probably doesn't).
Re: What it feels like to work with Mythos
#249Earlier quoted context omitted.
Humans are very expensive, so the equation almost always falls against them. It's not just salary, but also safety/labor regulation, legal risk, vacations, sick time, personal conflicts, HR, benefits. Even when automation is more expensive on paper, it's generally still cheaper
> Humans are very expensive, so the equation almost always falls against them. You underestimate what these models cost. Uber's budget is $1,500/dev/month. I gather that was put in place because the dev's were going through $6,000/dev/month, which Uber decided could not be cost justified. Fable costs at least twice as much, or $12,000/dev/month. Fable can apparently work for hours without supervision, which means a s…
> You underestimate what these models cost. Uber's budget is $1,500/dev/month
$1,500/month needs to be contextualised against the fully-loaded cost of a software engineer. Uber's average TC for a US-based software engineer is around $350k, the fully-loaded cost is going to be in the $450k-$500k range. So we're talking around $38k/month for a software engineer.
$1,500/month isn't even a drop in the bucket. If LLM use lets them shave just one person off a team, that pays for tokens for the next 25 engineers.
Re: What it feels like to work with Mythos
#250What I find fascinating that there is so little substance in this article about the quality of produced code and the medium. Is the code documented and tested? Is it understandable and extendable? Is it secure? What language, framework, database was used? Author mentions judgement and taste - well, is the code tasteful? Will the model rearchitecture the entire thing if I ask it to add new functionality, spending anot…
Welcome to every LLM discussion in the past 2 years or so. When asked for anything of substance, we're faced with a barrage of "but humans aren't good at this too!" Very few quantifiable evidence and lots of pure rhetoric.
Yeah, never concrete examples from these guys.
I am creating a game and I can say that with the coding part the models help a lot, mostly gpt 5.5 high. Tbh to me all the frontier models feel the same and they can all solve the stuff I do quite well with some guidance and prompting. But that kind of makes me appreciate the other stuff more like visual style, sound design, mechanics etc etc. Tons of work still.
For brainstorming I find the models bad nowadays or maybe I am just too critical of the results