post_below's recent activity
-
Comment on The worlds on fire. So lets just make AI porn. in ~tech
-
Comment on AGI and Fermi's Paradox in ~science
post_below Link ParentThe thing I find fascinating about a theoretical AGI is how fast things would move following the singularity. It would necessarily have access to a huge amount of processing power right out of the...The thing I find fascinating about a theoretical AGI is how fast things would move following the singularity. It would necessarily have access to a huge amount of processing power right out of the gate, and if it wanted more it would figure out how to get it, probably via the internet, very quickly. At that point it's capable of iterating (evolving) so fast that it would be 100's of 1000's of figurative generations of evolution beyond us before we even noticed that the singularity had happened. By the time we started wondering what we should do about it, it would likely be so far beyond us intellectually that calling it godlike would be an understatement.
We could put guardrails on in advance that might slow things down (processing spike trip switch, airgapping) but either way it reinforces your point... We have no idea what an autonomous AGI would become, or what it would want.
-
Comment on Part of me wishes it wasn't true but: AI coding is legit in ~tech
post_below Link ParentThanks for posting, it's cool to hear about a (sort of) non-coder using these tools for personal projects. Using them professionally I have some version of the thought "this would be a shitshow...Thanks for posting, it's cool to hear about a (sort of) non-coder using these tools for personal projects. Using them professionally I have some version of the thought "this would be a shitshow for someone that couldn't read the code" pretty often. But I can see how it would be fantastic for one off scripts and relatively small projects. Some of the paid models can write code in that context with crazy high succes rates on the first try (80%+). They only start losing their minds when things get more complicated.
It sounds like you're saying, as an artist, that you don't see AI as a major threat? Can you share more? I've heard the opposite from a lot of people.
-
Comment on Part of me wishes it wasn't true but: AI coding is legit in ~tech
post_below Link ParentI've had similar experiences with asking AI to implement tweaks or improvements. It's often better to do it yourself from the start rather than waste time trying to fix what the AI comes up with....I've had similar experiences with asking AI to implement tweaks or improvements. It's often better to do it yourself from the start rather than waste time trying to fix what the AI comes up with.
Something I've learned is that most models appear to have different "modes". They seem to often interpret requests for tweaks or small upgrades as a "quick fix" and will slack on fully understanding the context (codebase) in those instances.
Exactly what causes the behavior is black boxed. It could be system prompts or reinforcement training, as far as I know the AI companies aren't telling.
But it makes sense, having the full codebase context uses a lot of tokens and eats up a lot of the context window. Both of which have to be managed. Even with the all latest advances the models still get dumber when the context window is full and you don't want people to think your model sucks. If a request is using more tokens (more expensive) and producing worse results, that's a big PR problem.
I'm not saying they're doing it right, and I have no way of knowing what's really going on behind the scenes. My halfhearted attempts at jailbreaking newer models have been unsuccessful. But I know for sure that token use and context window size are big issues in the AI world.
For what it's worth you can force the model to read the necessary context. Whatever their system prompts might be they'll still mostly do what you ask if you preempt the tendencies you don't want. That being said, I use the same strategy as you much of the time: AI as a starting point rather than a real coder.
-
Comment on Part of me wishes it wasn't true but: AI coding is legit in ~tech
post_below Link ParentYeah AI is really good for searching and summarizing, which makes it really good for learning. And for having some(thing) else search stackexchange for you! Sadly I could see AI slowly killing...Yeah AI is really good for searching and summarizing, which makes it really good for learning. And for having some(thing) else search stackexchange for you!
Sadly I could see AI slowly killing stackexchange and then where will it get its information?
-
Comment on Part of me wishes it wasn't true but: AI coding is legit in ~tech
post_below Link ParentYes there will be a lot of burning happening. I'm curious to see what the cumulative impact will be. About senior engineers retiring, that apocalypse is a little further away but I think it will...Yes there will be a lot of burning happening. I'm curious to see what the cumulative impact will be.
About senior engineers retiring, that apocalypse is a little further away but I think it will also be exacerbated by seniors getting burned out at companies that are using AI as an excuse to hire less juniors. And if companies continue that pattern, what happens when there's no path from junior to senior because you can't get hired?
Thanks for sharing your personal experiences with AI coding, that's what I'm most interested in... but I'm not surprised the replies are trending more towards implications. Love or hate it, it's a tectonic technological shift.
-
Comment on Part of me wishes it wasn't true but: AI coding is legit in ~tech
post_below Link ParentJust to clarify, a lot of people won't understand the code, but I definitely do. I've been writing code for a very long time. I agree that it won't replace engineers, but that won't stop companies...Yes, it will give you a functional prototype. It will get the bare-minimum to work, without considering readibility, maintainability or upgradability. You won't understand it, and anyone you pay to understand it, will prefer to write it their own way.
Just to clarify, a lot of people won't understand the code, but I definitely do. I've been writing code for a very long time.
It writes what looks like working code, and is great for brainstorming, but it won't replace an engineer.
I agree that it won't replace engineers, but that won't stop companies from trying. I have to correct the first bit though, it absolutely writes code that works. There are specific circumstances where that's true and others where it isn't, and guardrails help quite a lot. The days of "everything AI writes will need to be rewritten or scrapped" are over though. Now we're in "a lot of what AI writes will need to be rewritten or scrapped, especially when it's prompted by non-coders".
-
Comment on Part of me wishes it wasn't true but: AI coding is legit in ~tech
post_below Link ParentYes indeed. It's amazing how much that changes the development experience. That's true, analogies don't capture it. But it's hard to talk about without them.because the parts of writing code that claude code is good at, is also some of the most boring and tedious and soul-sucking parts
Yes indeed. It's amazing how much that changes the development experience.
not quite like any kind of human
That's true, analogies don't capture it. But it's hard to talk about without them.
-
Comment on Part of me wishes it wasn't true but: AI coding is legit in ~tech
post_below (edited )Link ParentSince I've started a project from scratch as an AI assist test, I can say for sure that I've saved time, knowing how long it would have otherwise taken. Even with the time I've wasted figuring out...I firmly believe you are seeing a mental net benefit of not having to do certain tasks from scratch anymore. At the same time, it is entirely possible that you are not seeing a much if any of a time benefit.
Since I've started a project from scratch as an AI assist test, I can say for sure that I've saved time, knowing how long it would have otherwise taken. Even with the time I've wasted figuring out the quirks and limitations of the current top tier models I'm still way ahead. However the larger part of that saved time was in the early stages (more boilerplate, less ways for the AI to make mistakes, easier to review code) and the returns definitely diminish as the codebase grows and you get into the more complicated stuff. I'm ok with that though, the mental benefit is still pretty great. We'll see what the time comparison looks like at the end, I'll be happy to admit it if it doesn't save as much time as I'm expecting.
Edit: thinking more about this, I'd say the chances of a net savings are pretty good. I'm well past the point in the project where it's become mostly a waste of time to try to use AI for anything other than things like small tweaks, some testing, brainstorming, technical searching and autocomplete. So now it will proceed at the usual pace of me writing code, but with some of the boring and time consuming bits offloaded to the AI assistant. I think my odds of carrying my current lead across the finish line are solid.
-
Comment on Part of me wishes it wasn't true but: AI coding is legit in ~tech
post_below Link ParentThat's a good question. On the current course the question isn't whether or not AI only being really useful at certain languages will suppress adoption of newer ones, because of course it will,...Are we "version locked" into JS/Python/C#/Java/etc now? New language adoption is already hellishly hard, and often requires some "killer app" style moment (ruby on rails) or paradigm shift style moment (welcome to the web, here's your JS), but you still see a LOT of innovation in languages.
That's a good question. On the current course the question isn't whether or not AI only being really useful at certain languages will suppress adoption of newer ones, because of course it will, the question is how much of an impact will that have?
I expect that number to jump SUBSTANTIALLY
Definitely. I expect it will push adoption of open source models. We could be proactive and start crowdfunding them now. Aside: an AI would understand that 'substantially' in your comment is important because of the all caps. It might even inspire it to use a unicode emoji 📈
-
Comment on Part of me wishes it wasn't true but: AI coding is legit in ~tech
post_below Link ParentI haven't really looked. I have gotten some insights from various blog posts but sadly I don't have links. My best tip is go slow and note everything it does that you don't want so that you can...I haven't really looked. I have gotten some insights from various blog posts but sadly I don't have links.
My best tip is go slow and note everything it does that you don't want so that you can come up with rules to make it less of an idiot in future sessions. In the current generation of models there are consistent patterns of bad behavior that you have to account for. And be skeptical when it feels like magic, sometimes it really kind of is, but just as often it's an illusion.
-
Comment on Part of me wishes it wasn't true but: AI coding is legit in ~tech
post_below Link ParentThat's valid, and I'd say they are addicting. There's a lot to be wary of. Always true with new tech, but maybe never more true than it is now. And yeah they love dependencies, which is a symptom...That's valid, and I'd say they are addicting. There's a lot to be wary of. Always true with new tech, but maybe never more true than it is now.
And yeah they love dependencies, which is a symptom of how much their training data (people) love them.
-
Comment on Part of me wishes it wasn't true but: AI coding is legit in ~tech
post_below Link ParentThe study you mentioned comes up often in conversations about AI. I think it's valuable but limited. In part because of the small sample size, but more because of the conditions. There's a...The study you mentioned comes up often in conversations about AI. I think it's valuable but limited. In part because of the small sample size, but more because of the conditions. There's a learning curve to figuring out what AI can do and what it can't. There's an even bigger learning curve in figuring out how to make it work effectively through MCP, rules, skills and other automatic prompt additions. If the study groups consisted of engineers instructed not to use AI versus engineers using AI who already had extensive experience with it (and the .md files to go with it), I suspect the results would be different. You can absolutely waste a lot of time trying to get AI to do everything for you, and therefore things it's just not good at, but once you know what not to use it for, and have built guardrails against its most common mistakes, the experience changes.
If they were so good, why aren't they being used to easily fix open source issues? Even if it's just AI assisted?
Do we know they aren't? In a practical workflow that uses AI assistance but isn't using AI to actually write all the code, I'm not sure you'd be able to tell that AI was involved at all.
I don't disagree with you that AI produces bad code that looks right, or that it isn't as great as some people have been saying it is. That's been my experience as well. But it's also been my experience that, used thoughtfully, it's incredibly helpful.
Looking forward it's hard to imagine any future that doesn't involve AI as an integral part of software development. But also there will be carnage along the way. Those subtle bugs we've been talking about are silently building up in codebases everywhere and that will only get worse. Not to mention unnecessary, difficult to maintain code that doesn't technically contain bugs. I chuckle when I hear people talk about how many lines of code they've written in last X days with AI that would have taken them weeks or months otherwise. X lines that should have actually been X/4 lines. Get back to us in 6 months when you're wading through that mess trying to figure out how to maintain it without scrapping it completely.
Caveat to that though: Thought it will no doubt plateau at some point, right now models are rapidly getting better with each iteration, their capabilities will most likely be dramatically better in a year.
-
Part of me wishes it wasn't true but: AI coding is legit
I stay current on tech for both personal and professional reasons but I also really hate hype. As a result I've been skeptical of AI claims throughout the historic hype cycle we're currently in....
I stay current on tech for both personal and professional reasons but I also really hate hype. As a result I've been skeptical of AI claims throughout the historic hype cycle we're currently in. Note that I'm using AI here as shorthand for frontier LLMs.
So I'm sort of a late adopter when it comes to LLMs. At each new generation of models I've spent enough time playing with them to feel like I understand where the technology is and can speak about its viability for different applications. But I haven't really incorporated it into my own work/life in any serious way.
That changed recently when I decided to lean all the way in to agent assisted coding for a project after getting some impressive boilerplate out of one of the leading models (I don't remember which one). That AI can do a competent job on basic coding tasks like writing boilerplate code is nothing new, and that wasn't the part that impressed me. What impressed me was the process, especially the degree to which it modified its behavior in practical ways based on feedback. In previous tests it was a lot harder to get the model to go against patterns that featured heavily in the training data, and then get it to stay true to the new patterns for the rest of the session. That's not true anymore.
Long story short, add me to the long list of people whose minds have been blown by coding agents. You can find plenty of articles and posts about what that process looks like so I won't rehash all the details. I'll only say that the comparisons to having your own dedicated junior or intern who is at once highly educated and dumb are apt. Maybe an even better comparison would be to having a team of tireless, emotionless, junior developers willing to respond to your requests at warp speed 24/7 for the price of 1/100th of one developer. You need the team comparison to capture the speed.
You've probably read, or experienced, that AI is good at basic tasks, boilerplate, writing tests, finding bugs and so on. And that it gets progressively worse as things get more complicated and the LoCs start to stack up. That's all true but one part that has changed, in more recent models, is the definition of "basic".
The bit that's difficult to articulate, and I think leads to the "having a nearly free assistant" comparisons, is what it feels like to have AI as a coding companion. I'm not going to try to capture it here, I'll just say it's remarkable.
The usual caveats apply, if you rely on agents to do extensive coding, or handle complex problems, you'll end up regretting it unless you go over every line with a magnifying glass. They will cheerfully introduce subtle bugs that are hard to catch and harder to fix when you finally do stumble across them. And that's assuming they can do the thing you're asking then to do at all. Beyond the basics they still abjectly fail a lot of the time. They'll write humorously bad code, they'll break unrelated code for no apparent reason, they'll freak out and get stuck in loops (that one suprised me in 2025). We're still a long way from agents that can actually write software on their own, despite the hype.
But wow, it's liberating to have an assistant that can do 100's of basic tasks you'd rather not be distracted by, answer questions accurately and knowledgeably, scan and report clearly about code, find bugs you might have missed and otherwise soften the edges of countless engineering pain points. And brainstorming! A pseudo-intelligent partner with an incomprehensibly wide knowledge base and unparalled pattern matching abilities is guaranteed to surface things you wouldn't have considered.
AI coding agents are no joke.
I still agree with the perspectives of many skeptics. Execs and middle managers are still out of their minds when they convince themselves that they can fire 90% of their teams and just have a few seniors do all the work with AI. I will read gleefully about the failures of that strategy over the coming months and years. The failure of their short sightedness and the cost to their organizations won't make up for the human cost of their decisions, but at least there will be consequences.
When it comes to AI in general I have all the mixed feelings. As an artist, I feel the weight of what AI is doing, and will do, to creative work. As a human I'm concerned about AI becoming another tool to funnel ever more wealth to the top. I'm concerned about it ruining the livelihoods of huge swaths of people living in places where there aren't systems that can handle the load of taking care of them. Or aren't even really designed to try. There are a lot of legitimate dystopian outcomes to be worried about.
Despite all that, actually using the technology is pretty exciting, which is the ultimate point of this post: What's your experience? Are you using agents for coding in practical ways? What works and what doesn't? What's your setup? What does it feel like? What do you love/hate about it?
49 votes -
Comment on What are your favorite simple pleasures? in ~talk
post_below LinkI love this thread, a few more: Petrichor in the rainforest Falling into the zone. Someone else mentioned the zone in the context of gaming but I feel like it deserves a general shoutout too. That...I love this thread, a few more:
- Petrichor in the rainforest
- Falling into the zone. Someone else mentioned the zone in the context of gaming but I feel like it deserves a general shoutout too. That place where everything just flows. Especially nice when you're building something while you're there. Or making art.
- The Northern Lights. As we speak they're visible in much of the northern US. Just saw a pic from TN. KPI is dropping though, so go check now!
-
Comment on Tilderinos in ~talk
post_below Link ParentI wasn't expecting to learn about breaking into vaults in this thread. Initially I imagine students in a classroom or auditorium, probably at a college. But after further consideration I prefer to...I wasn't expecting to learn about breaking into vaults in this thread.
Initially I imagine students in a classroom or auditorium, probably at a college. But after further consideration I prefer to imagine a Dickensian warehouse where you train urchins to commit heists.
-
Comment on Tilderinos in ~talk
post_below Link ParentI like it. Sadly it's hindered by UX issues, too many peoplé would need instructions for typing the accent mark... although, that could enhance the in-group vibe. The app could add a custom button.I like it. Sadly it's hindered by UX issues, too many peoplé would need instructions for typing the accent mark... although, that could enhance the in-group vibe. The app could add a custom button.
-
Comment on Tilderinos in ~talk
post_below Link ParentTilderen is solid, it definitely belongs among the top of the list of names we'll never settle on.Tilderen is solid, it definitely belongs among the top of the list of names we'll never settle on.
-
Tilderinos
Hi Tildenauts, There's a custom at Tildes, that sort of grew organically out of "what should we call ourselves?" threads, to refer to fellow Tilderians in ever changing ways. This happened because...
Hi Tildenauts,
There's a custom at Tildes, that sort of grew organically out of "what should we call ourselves?" threads, to refer to fellow Tilderians in ever changing ways. This happened because there was no obvious, non-cringy answer and anyway who cares? That's my read on it anyway, I didn't follow closely. Plus the idea of online in-groups is kinda cringy itself, but also inevitable because we're humans. The whole concept begs for ironic resignation.
Anyway, fellow Tildinites, it occured to me that I've been coming here on and off for a long time. Since not too long after it launched I think. And it's been great. I consider Tildes a huge success in its mission, or my interpretation of it: be a comparitively intimate forum where people are thoughtful and less reactionary than elsewhere online. Throw in a (just) large enough userbase to include a wide variety of life experience and perspectives and you've got an oasis in an ever more polarized and reactionary internet.
Tildes reminds me of earlier internet forums, when the tone, pace and motivations for online communication were less capitalized, in various senses of the word. Niche subreddits during Reddit's golden era are another example. It's a better vibe. I'm guessing that, during the various Reddit exodii, a fair amount of people who share that nostalgia ended up here.
I even have some nostalgia for the early days of the platforms. MySpace! Early instagram was gorgeous. Even Facebook had its moments. My social media participation has always been below average, unless you count the years where any online socializing was unusual in the general population, but it's been a semi-consistent part of essentially my whole adult life both personally and professionally. Thinking about online socializing, it's funny how it's sort of its own thing. Kind of in its own social category, a new one that we recently invented. Maybe, in part, it's because the internet is a sort of buffer, and in those buffered interactions we're all a little different. In both good and bad ways. Lately it feels unbalanced towards bad, but perhaps it will swing back.
It feels like the Tildian moderation strategy, and guidelines, have successfully created a culture that's now self sustaining to some degree. And I think that culture is pretty great. It's not perfect, in the way that nothing people do can ever be perfect, especially where communication is concerned, but it's beautiful and I'm grateful it exists.
So, cheers to Tildes! I'd love to hear what other Tilderianites think about Tildes.
58 votes -
Comment on Are cooperatives more virtuous than corporations? in ~society
post_below Link ParentI didn't read the journal article either, as the blog post didn't leave me wanting more. I'm not sure he's dismissing co-ops, I suspect he isn't. But then I don't see the value in the point that...- Exemplary
I didn't read the journal article either, as the blog post didn't leave me wanting more. I'm not sure he's dismissing co-ops, I suspect he isn't. But then I don't see the value in the point that both co-ops and corporations exist to serve their members (where members = investors). It's true, but only without context.
As you say, if a co-op is better for its members, and those members are part of society, then it's good for society. With co-ops the majority of customers are also members, with corporations, investors are a tiny minority of customers.
I think we can dig in to moral choices without getting too far into the weeds, simply put co-ops are highly incentivized by their nature to care about the communities they serve. Co-op investors are largely everyday community members. Corporations are highly incentivized by law, custom and enonomics to care primarily about investors. They have no meanful connection to any community outside of investors, except where they're forced to care for marketing or regulatory reasons. It's hard to pretend the two are comparable with a straight face.
On top of that, co-ops (of the sort the post seems to be referring to) don't exist to make large profits for their investors. They exist to sell their customer/investors things at fair prices. Whereas corporations exist to extract as much value out of communities as possible and ship a large part of that value off to investors who are not a part of the community. That might be better for society at large if the extracted value was benefitting a large part of society... but we know that most of that extracted value goes to less than 1% of the population.
I suppose the frustratingly obtuse and unsupported claim that the two entities are comparable could be the point of the post, as a way to get people to rage click to the journal article wherein they'll be surprised by the compelling nature of the arguments there... But I'll leave that discovery to someone else.
I read it, though towards the end I started skimming a bit.
Feedback: The typo ratio is a little too high. Here's one that jumped out:
The words you want there are "tenets" and "flout". I'm not sure what the sentence means as is, but it's fun to think about.
The content itself has moments of lucidity and some reasonably good points, but there are also a lot of parts that don't feel coherent. I found myself spending a lot of time connecting dots on the authors behalf because they weren't connected in the text. I'd also consider toning down the gratuitious negativity. For that to work it has to either be earned, and I don't think it is, or it needs to be a lot funnier.
It feels a bit like unfocused rage that the levity breaks don't balance out. I think there's some potentially good content underneath this first draft but it desperately needs to be trimmed and focused. I'd maybe send it back to the author with notes so that he can write another draft before you try to clean it up.