661–668 of 668 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, relative to the universe, but it's more than those who haven't had idealism beaten out of them by the world.
no, not relative to the universe, relative to recent history. 40 years is not much in the context of history, which is the topic. your life experience is small and unimportant at the world-historical scale.
If this article was written a year ago, I would have agreed. But knowing what I know today, I highly doubt that the outcomes of LLM/non-LLM users will be anywhere close to similar. LLMs are exceptionally good at building prototypes. If the professor needs a month, Bob will be done with the basic prototype of that paper by lunch on the same day, and try out dozens of hypotheses by the end of the day. He will not be ch…
Speaking from personal experience, 99% people/students don't, and that is the problem.
https://boxobarks.leaflet.pub/3mj42airv3s2o#fingerprints-of-...
The article is well-written and makes cogent points about why we need "centaurs", human/computer hybrids who combine silicon- and carbon-based reasoning. Interestingly, the text has a number of AI-like writing artifacts, e.g. frequent use of the pattern "The problem isn't X. The problem is Y." Unlike much of the typical slop I see, I read it to the end and found it insightful. I think that's because the author worked…
The framing of the essay around learning through "grunt work" is not deep, it's simply that this specific phrase appeared in two of the sources. Anything that looks like insight is plagiarised directly from the sources in some fashion. I've covered in my evidence the pivot phrases where direct summaries of the essay incorrectly appear to transition to the author's own ideas, but there are parts right through the essay that come from the sources. No deep thinking by the prompter required.
The article is well-written and makes cogent points about why we need "centaurs", human/computer hybrids who combine silicon- and carbon-based reasoning. Interestingly, the text has a number of AI-like writing artifacts, e.g. frequent use of the pattern "The problem isn't X. The problem is Y." Unlike much of the typical slop I see, I read it to the end and found it insightful. I think that's because the author worked…
Nope. It was actually written entirely by Claude. https://boxobarks.leaflet.pub/3mj42airv3s2o#fingerprints-of-... The framing of the essay around learning through "grunt work" is not deep, it's simply that this specific phrase appeared in two of the sources. Anything that looks like insight is plagiarised directly from the sources in some fashion. I've covered in my evidence the pivot phrases where direct summaries o…
I certainly agree that the author should disclose the use of an AI, how much is human vs silicon, and clarify which ideas are his own and which are not. I've written to him to ask about that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nope. It was actually written entirely by Claude. https://boxobarks.leaflet.pub/3mj42airv3s2o#fingerprints-of-... The framing of the essay around learning through "grunt work" is not deep, it's simply that this specific phrase appeared in two of the sources. Anything that looks like insight is plagiarised directly from the sources in some fashion. I've covered in my evidence the pivot phrases where direct summaries o…
Thanks for writing that up. You convinced me that there was more Claude here than I'd thought, but I didn't see evidence that the author hadn't edited and supplemented, which is what I was suggesting. In fact, your last observation about correcting an erroneous date makes my point, not yours: Claude made a mistake, and the (human) author fixed it, thus improving the essay. I certainly agree that the author should dis…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for writing that up. You convinced me that there was more Claude here than I'd thought, but I didn't see evidence that the author hadn't edited and supplemented, which is what I was suggesting. In fact, your last observation about correcting an erroneous date makes my point, not yours: Claude made a mistake, and the (human) author fixed it, thus improving the essay. I certainly agree that the author should dis…
The author replied quickly and described his use of AI as very limited and just for grammar and wording. I believe him, based both on the text of the article itself and what he told me.
I don't see how my point about the erroneous date makes your point. He POSTED IT with that date, and only changed it AFTER someone pointed it out, then BLOCKED them.
If he did write it by hand though, that means he is admitting to plagiarising the sources, and also to framing that makes absolutely no sense, like saying Schwartz didn't say something that he literally did say. So, great job I guess!
I fully believe that he used only a general prompt, and anything in the essay that seems specific, Claude has mined from the sources. I am going to try to reverse engineer the prompt.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel like the models and harnesses had a step change in capability around December, as somebody who’s been using them daily since early/mid 2025. It’s gone from me doing the majority of the programming, to me doing essentially none, since December. And that change felt quite sudden. The more recent shift after December is mostly explained by people at my company catching up with the events that happened in December…
I can relate to the feeling - this timing tracks for when most, if not all of my friends, all my co-workers (even the few who were resisting to adopt any AI toloing) flocked to just "Claude Code". Similar to how the masses gobbled VS Code a while back. Company started doling out Claude Code configs, everything is now cli/agentic AI harnessed and news about "90% of this company's code is now AI Generated" pop up every…