It is not about claude, it is about not normalising unwanted behaviour in society, in general.
1,055 karma · joined October 4, 2015
I am in Western Australia
There is the house wirer, the panel builder, automotive electrician, HV, marine, drilling, industrial, maintenance etc etc.
Some kinds pay better, others yield work almost wherever you go, others lend themselves to starting your own business better.
It is nowhere near as homogenous as often described.
Additionally the ability to convert bookmarks<->named and to set bookmarks based on the font size and style can be incredibly useful.
Where I live, on the taller buildings it is common to have banks of elevators which only service certain floors, eg floors 2:25 and 26-50 are two different banks of elevators.
Some modern elevators have two cars per shaft, imagine scheduling that.
I then got it to do lunar lander, that was also perfect, and very hard to land.
However if you do this as an executeable specification then the job of core functionality is finished with the specification, with significantly beeter quality, potentially.
This sounds a lot harder than it is - most behaviour is state based and it is possible to define such behaviour with an executeable specification.
In the Functional Safety world this is often your best option.
I wrote my own software package to enable such practices and once used to a slightly different way of thinking it works very well.
must be taken with pepper extract to increase bio availability, I buy it ready to go from the supermarket where they keep it with the vitamins and supplements.
just because no one has worked out how, does not mean it is ineffective.
So the easiest way to eliminate a lot of issues is clearly agree and define expectations up front.
There is a reason a whole branch of project management is called Expectation Management.
What can you do with a whole team comprised only of Expert Beginners?
it is fast, there is no fucking gateway fuckaround or any other similar issues, up and going in seconds
straight away I added two skills, that it wrote for itself, read my gmails and attachments, and browse the web, text browser first up, render page and screenshot with OCR for javascript heavy pages\
then I asked it, find the best value ram in my area, second hand as well as new, try gumtree and facebook marketplace, plus anything else relevant, bam - 15 seconds maybe a concise summarised range of options
then on another project, I told it to /study and then used the gmail plugin to access all the relevant gmails and attachments (which included minutes of all the meetings) and it was fully up to date with the project I am working on and ready to go
best agent I have used so far by a country mile, if you don't try it then that is your loss
did I mention it was fast, like 3x to 5x better productivity fast compared to openclaw, at least
one thing it does not do is support the up arrow/down arrow to scroll thru past commands, but you can just tell it, "run that websearch for ram again" etc, i will totally live witht his for all the other positives
The thing is running local LLMs will give some kind of reliability and fixed expectations that saves a lot of time - yeah sure Claude might be fantastic one day, but what do I do when the same workload churns out shit the next and I am halfway thru updating and referencing a 500 document set?
Better the devil you know and all that.
While the two can be closely aligned, it is not neccesarily the case, if not often misaligned priorities.
Many pdfs are hard to read based on a consistant set of rules, reliance on edge cases and context and conventions.
Then, in the last couple of decades there has been a move to performance based standards.
These work by the designers trying to anticipate hazards specific to the design and it's intended duty, and then providing mitigation to reduce the risk down to sn acceptable level.
This has a number of poditive outcomes, but not least is the expenditure on mitigation is directed in the most economic manner.
All this requires a systrmd approach, and when properly applied has been shown to yield superiour results.
We are now in the early days of working through a similar process with AI.
They most definately do work for some use cases, but how they are used is important.
Just because you apply human processes and systems to AI based workflows and don't get historically expected results, this is zero basis to claim the sky is falling with use of AI in coding.
Often, the use of AI is a lazy case of not wanting to spend the time to understand the essence of the problem and solve it directly, often far more efficiently. (Not always, but often).
The ability of getting results that surpass your understanding, and quickly, is seducing, but you invariably end up being capped on the usefullness.
AI generally seems to raise anyone with the basic skills to "expert beginner" in almost any field, but it is then a big struggle to get past this stage, without substantial extra work.
Specification of software has been very weak for decades, and little effort has been put towards defining methadologies of specification that are both exhaustive and unambiguous.
It is possible, I know because I work in an exotic niche where being exhaustive and unambiguous isnot optional - Functional Safety. Here you might spend 90% or more of your time planning what and how to code, before writing the first line.
The cost - I have worked on projects where, across the duration of the project, the average production of code was less than two lines a day.
But when a single error could result in the death of 100, or 300, people, then this time worth it.
You can't get this kind of quality when you pivot twice a week, you need to have fairly fixed objectives.
The are ways to get better outcomes that are known, but not widely applied, and they could do with some development to make them accessible. Some has been done, eg Leslie Lamport and TLA+.
But, as you might have been told as a child, don't get upset that you did not get what you wanted when you failed to ask for it properly.
Almost everything is state based behaviour.
On the other hand, if it is not, then stop wasting effort arguing against the inevitable and use that effort to get ahead of the curve.
Either way, whinging about it is the least effective use of your skills and time.
This usually results from an inadequate system-subsystem decomposition and/or not considering modes, both of which lead to hierarchal state machines instead of one big flat one.
This aspect of architecture is difficult to teach, it is one of the "black arts" that comes from experience and is difficult to codify.
Just one example why, is that often it might require the synthesis of state machines not directly evident as needed from the functionality, eg to perform a one to many or many to one functionality.
But we can short circuit that and consider in terms of distributed generation (mostly solar) and storage (batteries), see further down.
But the group website has no real information about real people involved, it's best information is some links to some papers that are not even clear if any members of the group were involved in. There is a photo, but I couldn't see that anyone was named.
Maybe in my 3 minute look I missed something, but it rapidly became fairly obvious that is about all the idea and website seemed to warrant.
It is possible that one person created the website as it totally comes across as "havea big idea and try and cast a big shadow and see if someone will bring some more sunlight".
If I am wrong, then they really need to do a better job of their website, otherwise it looks like an attempt bootstrap on a thought bubble, at best.
Some background:
I live where we have the most isolated grid interconnect system in the world (and it is not Texas) and in this system generation is about 50% of the cost and transmission is the other 50%, so the incentive to optimise the transmission network is probably higher than anywhere else in the world.
The idea proposed sounds attractive, but would have been even more so when there was a far greater abundance of base load generation that could only cycle at relatively slow rates compared to the change in demand rates, but now, as generation becomes increasingly more distributedthe nature of the problems change a little (the duck curve, for example).
Analogs to this concept exist, eg water infrastructure where in order to not have to build expensive fatter pipes for water to serve increasing populations, local water towers are built that pump up at night during low demand and draw down during peaks. There are distinct available economies there, but the round trip energy efficiency is also potentially very high.
I am not sure that economically any similar equivelent for electricity could be implmenented, especially when compared to the cost of solar generation and the recent plunge in battery costs, it now is far more likely that at a household level it would be cheaper to get some solar panels and a decent sized battery and be done with it, at city block level probably even more economic as there is effectively no transmission, it is all distribution, so near 50% could be saved already on end use costs.
I just don't see it.
If you adequately specify what you want, then LLM's today are perfectly capable to produce code of a quality exceeding most humans.
But what has been going on is that many of the details of architecture and code have been implied as "good practice" or "experience" because it is time consuming to write a good specification, partly because you need to first work out exactly what you want.