Fixing type checker errors should be one the least time consuming things you do. This was previously consuming a lot of your time?
A lot of the AI discourse would be more effective if we could all see the actual work one another is doing with it (similar to the cloudflare post).
Yes, this is a frequent problem both here and everywhere else. The discussions need to include things like exact model version, inference parameters, what system prompt you used, what user prompt, what code you gave it, what exactly it replied and so much more details, as currently almost every comment is "Well, I used Sonnet last week and it worked great" without any details. Not to mention discussions around local models missing basic stuff like what quantization (if any) and what hardware you're running it on. People just write out "Wow fast model" or stuff like that, and call it a day.
Although I understand why, every comment be huge if everyone always add sufficient context. I don't know the solution to this, but it does frustrate me.
[1]: https://github.com/cloudflare/workers-oauth-provider/
[2]: https://tools.simonwillison.net/
[3]: https://steveklabnik.com/writing/a-tale-of-two-claudes/
While I agree with "more details", the amount of details you're asking for is ... ridiculous. This is a HN comment, not a detailed study.
I'm not asking for anything, nor providing anything as "a solution", just stating a problem. The second paragraph in my comment is quite literally about that.
Maybe keeping your HN profile/gist/repo/webpage up to date would be better.
These tools have turned out to be great at this stuff. I don’t think I’ve turned over any interesting problems to an LLM and had it go well, but by using them to take care of drudgery, I have a lot more time to think about the interesting problems.
I would suggest that instead of asking people to post their work, try it out on whatever bullshit tasks you’ve been avoiding. And I specifically mean “tasks”. Stuff where the problem has already been solved a thousand times before.