371–380 of 748 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is exactly right. By offloading this trivial task to the LLM, Simon has abandoned the opportunity to evaluate the abstraction with additional information and improve it. Instead, we let the agent spend $12 and make the fix while learning nothing.
[flagged]
Is that satire? It created a whole browser and server environment just for suggesting overflow-x: hidden? That's supposed to be junior level capabilities.
How can a LLM be assigned an emotion as being "proactive". This is highly misleading to anyone that scans just the headlines. What actually happened is that the user started a prompt, and Claude took $12 worth of tokens to resolve the issue. How it did so was basically looping until it got to the answer How is this proactive? It's literally being token greedy and maximising revenue for the LLM owner. People really ne…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I haven't yet had an agent rm -rf files. I've had one f up an account by placing 2000 limit orders at the wrong price, but that's another story.
I've had agents run `rm -rf`, but it's been on directories that did actually need to be removed. To a certain extent I think the existence of `rm -rf` as a command that runs blindly without any understanding of what it's deleting is the problem.
Yes, and the lack of a Recycle Bin of any sort is even more puzzling. I think both servers and desktop PCs across all OSes should have it by default, so unsafe deletes would be something you'd have to go out of your way to even enable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand what you mean by "objective" here. You're welcome to believe that the pricing I quoted is low and enterprise companies pay more than that, despite the abundant evidence I've provided in this thread. It sounds to me like you think I'm biased towards Anthropic, despite me highlighting how their model charged $12 for a two line CSS change due to it being "relentlessly proactive". (I also called their…
[flagged]
Is that satire? It created a whole browser and server environment just for suggesting overflow-x: hidden? That's supposed to be junior level capabilities.
I called it fascinating and used it as an example of Fable being "relentlessly proactive".
This to me reads like a poignant commentary on the catastrophic loss of human agency, with the actual commit being highly revealing [0]. Author wants to hide a horizontal scrollbar. Any junior frontend dev worth their salt will be asking right away "where do I stick `overflow-x: hidden;`?" A complete solution will then require hitting "Inspect element" in the browser to find the CSS class and running (rip)grep to fin…
(Dozens of people in this thread implying that any web dev should have known to solve it with overflow-x: hidden and not one of them have addressed that browser difference yet.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is exactly right. By offloading this trivial task to the LLM, Simon has abandoned the opportunity to evaluate the abstraction with additional information and improve it. Instead, we let the agent spend $12 and make the fix while learning nothing.
People are missing that Willison is among the very best people we have in the role of (for lack of a good name): early access to frontier models, evaluate them in real scenarios, no wishful thinking, hype, or doom, communicate the possibilities. Yes he could have fixed this himself but then he would have learned nothing about the AI, and we wouldn't have read a fascinating and important article.
there is absolutely zero value in spending time to learn about new models as in few months new model will be out and whatever you learned about the current one will be useless.
Also with models getting better and better you have to know less and less to achieve same results.
Fascinated to think about how it was trained...