HN devolved into a cheap product review. this forum now is like reddit being taken by nothing but fake accounts hyping one mobile phone or game console or movie. so tiring.
Anthropic Claude 3.5 can create icalendar files, so I did this
71–80 of 174 posts
Re: Anthropic Claude 3.5 can create icalendar files, so I did this
#72HN devolved into a cheap product review. this forum now is like reddit being taken by nothing but fake accounts hyping one mobile phone or game console or movie. so tiring.
The account that posted the link is 12 years old, your account is 9 months old.
Re: Anthropic Claude 3.5 can create icalendar files, so I did this
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, which boils down to "verify".
It's possible to trust (or have faith) in my car being able to drive another 50k miles without breaking down. But if I bring it to a mechanic to have the car inspected just in case, does that mean I never had trust/faith in the car to begin with? "I trust my coworkers write good code, but I verify with code reviews" -- doing code reviews doesn't mean you don't trust your coworker. Yet another way to look at it: peopl…
We're getting into the definition of trust, but to me trust means exactly "I don't need to verify".
If I say I trust you to write correct code, I don't mean "I'm sure your mistakes won't be intentional", I mean "I'm sure you won't have mistakes". If I need to check your code for mistakes, I don't trust you to write correct code.
I don't know anyone who will hear "I trust you to write correct code, now let me make sure it's correct" and think "yes, this sentence makes sense".
Re: Anthropic Claude 3.5 can create icalendar files, so I did this
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is semi-offtopic, but "trust but verify" is an oxymoron. Trusting something means I don't have to verify whether it's correct (I trust that it is), so the saying, in the end, is "don't verify but verify".
French armed forces have a better version of this saying. “Trust does not exclude control.” They’re still going to check for explosives under cars that want to park in French embassies.
It’s interesting to notice that etymologically speaking the French and English words have completely different roots and therefore evokes slightly different ideas which are lost in translation.
Trust shares its root with truth. It’s directly related to believing in the veracity of something.
Confiance comes from the Latin confidere which means depositing something to someone while having faith they are going to take good care of it. The accent is on the faith in the relationship, not the truthfulness. The tension between trust and control doesn’t really exist in French. You can have faith but still check.
Re: Anthropic Claude 3.5 can create icalendar files, so I did this
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's possible to trust (or have faith) in my car being able to drive another 50k miles without breaking down. But if I bring it to a mechanic to have the car inspected just in case, does that mean I never had trust/faith in the car to begin with? "I trust my coworkers write good code, but I verify with code reviews" -- doing code reviews doesn't mean you don't trust your coworker. Yet another way to look at it: peopl…
We're getting into the definition of trust, but to me trust means exactly "I don't need to verify". If I say I trust you to write correct code, I don't mean "I'm sure your mistakes won't be intentional", I mean "I'm sure you won't have mistakes". If I need to check your code for mistakes, I don't trust you to write correct code. I don't know anyone who will hear "I trust you to write correct code, now let me make sur…
“I trust that you believe your code is correct, now let’s double check”.
Or maybe the proverb needs to be rewritten as “feign trust and verify”
Re: Anthropic Claude 3.5 can create icalendar files, so I did this
#76You just have to double check the results whenever you tell Claude to extract lists and data. 99.9% of it will be correct, but sometimes 1 or 2 records are off. This kind of error is especially hard to notice because you're so impressed that Claude managed to do the extract task at all -- plus the results look wholly plausible upon eyeballing -- that you wouldn't expect anything to be wrong at all. But LLMs can get t…
Have two LLMs do the task and compare.
Or three or four or five!
https://openreview.net/pdf?id=zj7YuTE4t8
Re: Anthropic Claude 3.5 can create icalendar files, so I did this
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
The "off by one" predilection of LLMs is going to lead to this massive erosion of trust in whatever "Truth" is supposed to be, and it's terrifying and going to make for a bumpy couple of years. (Or the complete collapse of objective knowledge, on a long enough time horizon.) It's one thing to ask an LLM when George Washington was born, and have it return "May 20, 2020." It's another thing to ask it, and have it matte…
This is semi-offtopic, but "trust but verify" is an oxymoron. Trusting something means I don't have to verify whether it's correct (I trust that it is), so the saying, in the end, is "don't verify but verify".
Is it an oxymoron to generate an asymmetrical cryptographic signature, send it to someone, and that someone verify the signature with the public key?
Why not just "trust" them instead? You have a contact and you know them, can't you trust them?
This is what "trust but verify" means. It means audit everything you can. Do not really on trust alone.
An entire civilization can be built with this methodology. It would be a much better one than the one we have now.
Re: Anthropic Claude 3.5 can create icalendar files, so I did this
#78Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is semi-offtopic, but "trust but verify" is an oxymoron. Trusting something means I don't have to verify whether it's correct (I trust that it is), so the saying, in the end, is "don't verify but verify".
Is it an oxymoron to generate an asymmetrical cryptographic signature, send it to someone, and that someone verify the signature with the public key? Why not just "trust" them instead? You have a contact and you know them, can't you trust them? This is what "trust but verify" means. It means audit everything you can. Do not really on trust alone. An entire civilization can be built with this methodology. It would be…
> Is it an oxymoron to generate an asymmetrical cryptographic signature, send it to someone, and that someone verify the signature with the public key?
Of course not. I verify because I don't trust them.
> Why not just "trust" them instead? You have a contact and you know them, can't you trust them?
No, the risk of trust is too high against the cost of spending a second verifying.
> This is what "trust but verify" means. It means audit everything you can. Do not really on trust alone.
Your comment just showed an example of something I don't trust and asked "why not trust instead"? The question even undermines your very point, because "why not trust them instead?" assumes (correctly) that I don't trust them, so I need to verify.
Re: Anthropic Claude 3.5 can create icalendar files, so I did this
#79Maybe useful in some cases, but this calendar has a heading saying the lessons are "every other week" so you don't have to make 13 calendar entries. It takes a few seconds but you can make a calendar entry on September 13, tell your calendar app that it repeats every two weeks, and then you delete the six "vacation" slots. This is much faster.
Re: Anthropic Claude 3.5 can create icalendar files, so I did this
#80You just have to double check the results whenever you tell Claude to extract lists and data. 99.9% of it will be correct, but sometimes 1 or 2 records are off. This kind of error is especially hard to notice because you're so impressed that Claude managed to do the extract task at all -- plus the results look wholly plausible upon eyeballing -- that you wouldn't expect anything to be wrong at all. But LLMs can get t…
I completely agree. If correctness matters, then it’s probably better to use LLMs to write the code than to let LLMs be the code.