181–190 of 290 posts
This whole Copilot vs HUD debate instantly brought to mind a classic Japanese anime from 1991 called Future GPX Cyber Formula ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_GPX_Cyber_Formula ). Yeah, it’s a racing anime set in the then-distant future of 2015, where cars come with full-on intelligent AIs. The main character’s car, Asurada, is basically a "Copilot" in every sense. It was designed by his dad to be more than jus…
I'm very curious if a toggle would be useful that would display a heatmap of a source file showing how surprising each token is to the model. Red tokens are more likely to be errors, bad names, or wrong comments.
Even if something is surprising just because it's a novel algorithm, it warrants better documentation - but commenting the code explaining how it works will make the code itself less surprising! In short, it's probably possible (and it's maybe a good engineering practice) to structure the source such as no specific part is really surprising It reminds me how LLMs finally made people to care about having good document…
Honestly I've mostly seen the opposite - impenetrable code translated to English by AI
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're getting downvoted - and flagged - because you're repeatedly breaking the HN guidelines. You may want to consider whether that's a path you want to continue.
Not sure you understand what has been going on but thanks for your concern.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think tests should be rewritten as much as needed. But to counter the invariant part, maybe let the user zoom back and forth through past revisions and pull in whatever they want to the current version, in case something important is deleted? And then allow “pinning” of some stuff so it can’t be changed? Would that solve for your concerns?
> I think tests should be rewritten as much as needed. Yes, I agree. The nuance is that they need to be rewritten independently and without touching the code. You can't change both and expect to get a working system. I'm speaking based on personal experience, by the way. Today's LLMs don't enforce correctness out of the box and agent mode has only one goal: getting things to work. I had agent mode flip invariants in…
There could be some visual language for how recently changes happened to the LLM-generated tests (or code for TDD mode).. then you'd be able to see that a test failed and was changed recently. Would that help?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What I understand is that if this has already gotten two of your comments killed, and will eventually get your account banned if you keep it up. I'm only bothering with this at all because I see from your profile that you make reasonable comments quite regularly.
Consider that I'm being reasonable.
It's a dumb hill to die on.
AI powered this, AI powered that, what most people don't realise is that the next game changer would be Al powered batteries
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even if something is surprising just because it's a novel algorithm, it warrants better documentation - but commenting the code explaining how it works will make the code itself less surprising! In short, it's probably possible (and it's maybe a good engineering practice) to structure the source such as no specific part is really surprising It reminds me how LLMs finally made people to care about having good document…
> It reminds me how LLMs finally made people to care about having good documentation - if not for other people, for the AIs to read and understand the system Honestly I've mostly seen the opposite - impenetrable code translated to English by AI
Perhaps to get that decent documentation it took a decent bit of agentic effort (or even multiple passes using different models) to truly understand it and eliminate hallucinations, so getting that high quality and accurate summary into a comment could save a lot of tokens and time in the future.
I'm very curious if a toggle would be useful that would display a heatmap of a source file showing how surprising each token is to the model. Red tokens are more likely to be errors, bad names, or wrong comments.
[flagged]
I don't really know where that's coming from, I'm just a dude who connected the idea in the article to an old idea that I haven't seen tried yet. The only thing I truly don't appreciate is you made one comment saying the text of my post had changed. It didn't.