411–420 of 786 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Raw_Claude can just go straight in prod.
I guarantee that the major players will offer straight-to-CEO interfaces where the user provides ALL info and AI will proceed to orchestrate the entire company, from finances to deployment. We're screwed, without protection.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The ones who get more productive are either the very incompetent who get pulled up to the AI-floor level, or the very competent who know when and how to use it and for what. The midwits are too proud to use it and instead placate themselves that their precious skill is more special and immune to mechanization than it really is. Many many people have jobs where their contribution is granting access to deliberately und…
I would bet real cash money that many many people, including your coworkers, think that anyone who unironically uses the term "midwit" is completely and totally obnoxious.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At my dayjob there is a person spearheading ai across the enterprise. They generated lots of documentation across the whole stack and now makes all PO/BAs read it if it's correct. So not just 300 lines - he unironically generated thousands of lines of "documentation" and is now making hundreds of people review it for him Complete brainrot Au psychosis is getting seriously outrageous at this point Thankfully I'm a dev…
I think a lot of that is people who were always very insecure because they’re mediocre engineers. Previously asking questions or not understanding something was a bit painful but now you can hear “you’re absolutely right!” and make progress all day every day. Until you need to interact with actual humans and that’s why you try to minimise it, hiding behind ai generated content.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think people tend to forget that not only do we ourselves have different skillsets and can be amazing at one thing but horrible but another, but this also applies to other people in the world! Far all we know, there is an amazing developer out there who without LLMs, might have been the single best developer in the country, but even this person might not be able to figure out how to effectively work with LLMs. And…
> Far all we know, there is an amazing developer out there who without LLMs, might have been the single best developer in the country, but even this person might not be able to figure out how to effectively work with LLMs. And vice-versa too. If working with LLMs effectively means accepting subpar results or be a reverse centaur, then I’d be glad not to be able to work with them. I’ve never seen a good example where…
Both of these can be quite invisible. But the benefit is there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You cannot walk 100 miles in a day, but anyone with a bit of training can cycle that in an afternoon. It's not a matter of effort or laziness, it's simply not possible. The stitching comment is just pedantic. People don't hand stitch like a machine not because they are lazy, it's because it's ineffective and impractical. It's not impossible to drive screws directly into softwood by hand, but you'd never get anything…
Minor nitpick with your first sentence: I do not believe "anyone with a bit of training" is an accurate way to describe what is required for pedaling a bicycle at 20 mph for 5 solid hours. At a time when I was in better shape than the average person, the most I ever worked up to was 40 miles, and it was brutal . In my entire middle-aged life, I have met exactly one person who believably claimed to have done 100 miles…
A lot of odd takes on this, the only times I have said “Claude said: …” was equivalent to “let me google that for you” in the olden times. If someone asks me something and by pasting their question into Claude I get the correct answer it means that person needs to learn how to use the tools available to them better.
The times that I "Claude said:" are almost always a case where Claude gave the correct answer.
The real problem is if you paste "Claude said:" without reading what Claude said. Have seen this happen and goes something like:
Sr Engineer: "Claude said:"
Me: "But that doesn't make sense because of X"
Sr Engineer: (having actually engaged thinking effort: human) "Oh yeah, not sure why Claude said that, I think we should do Y instead"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Replace claude code with your cousin or another employee as a thought exercise. So write to a colleague asking to finish what your cousin/another employee thinks needs to be done. I think most people would say describe the problem clearly so that I can solve it and be responsible for the fix or let your cousin/other employee finish the job and own the solution. This is offloading of accountability while denying credi…
Really, you are comparing the latest claude opus/fable vs my cousin with 0 knowledge of the application (user or developer)? I'm not sure how to reply to that.
OK but can you talk to my specific claude code conversation that has 6 months of context on the mechanism you are struggling with?