Claude's performative "this request was sooo dangerous that we downgraded to Opus" is wearing me down I ask it straightfoward questions, nothing shady, nothing complicated, and it tells me it's too dangerous for Fable. What BS.
AI is grown more than designed - it is, to first degree, the product of repeating a straightforward optimization step many times on a hard-to-imagine amount of compute.
This is not to be complacent about the risks, but it is to urge caution when assuming that shifting the perceptions of other societies will ever be straightforward.
the reviewer is the principal, the contributor is the agent, and code review only worked because the reviewer could cheaply infer effort from reading the code. Agents collapse that signal.
And not only that, but like humans were already a bit of a bottleneck in the review process. Now it can be worse because things that we fairly straightforward changes that some companies had automation around reviewing, they've removed that reviewing because if AI is involved and they're worried about the verifiability or the reliability of the code.
a swarm of agents on the internet could collaborate to improve LLMs and could potentially even like run circles around frontier labs. Like who knows, you know? Um yeah, like maybe that's even possible. Like frontier labs have a huge amount of trusted compute but the earth is much bigger and has huge amount of untrusted compute.
Melissa Perri explains how laying the foundation for great product management can help companies solve real customer problems while achieving business goals. By understanding how to communicate and collaborate within a company structure, you can create a product culture that benefits both the business and the customer.
To get to principal, you need to put yourself on the critical path. To be effective as a principal and go beyond it, you need to actively remove yourself from it.
Now that we have the answers, it all looks very obvious, and mostly straightforward.
Their words now
I should have been pointing out red flags starting back at WWDC last year, and I am embarrassed and sorry that I didn’t see what should have been very clear to me from the start.
And of course, what they were negotiating about was NATO expansion into Ukraine, which was the principal cause of the war. People in the West don't want to hear that argument because if it is true, which it is, then the West is principally responsible for this bloodbath that's now taking place.
This is how I frame it: if the effort required to replace or fork a dependency should it go unmaintained is measured in engineer-months, that’s a critical dependency and retaining its maintainers probably makes good business sense.
A korrent is a belief a person has stated in their own words: one
sentence stating the claim, backed by a quote and a source, kept at
korrents.com.
Under a name here, the quoted block is what they actually said.
The korrent beneath it is the claim those words support, in
korrents' wording — tap it to see the record, its source, and who
else holds it.
Nobody here wrote their own korrents. They are compiled from public
statements, and a person can change their mind, which is recorded too.
About the English under a post
Some people here publish in a language other than English. Where they
do, this site shows a machine translation beneath the post, in
this typeface — the site's own, not theirs.
The post itself is never changed, moved or hidden: what is set in the
serif above is exactly what the person published, and it is what to
quote them on. A translation can be wrong in ways that matter,
especially about tone.
Only the post's own words are translated. A quoted post, a linked
article and a belief on korrents.com
are left in their original language.