draebek

> I don't think it's that early tbh, agentic coding has ~90% adoption in the US.

Where does that 90% figure come from?

> Viral disease is not being associated with more and more long term diseases.

You meant to write "now being associated with more and more long term diseases", right?

I just actually thought that many of the great artists absolutely did paint, sculpt, or draw their creations "by hand", themselves. I suppose they used tools: the brush, chisel, pencil. Not sure how comparable those are to having an LLM write code for you.

Is this sarcasm? I can't tell.

You know they cause a majority of the code of the core logic to execute, right? Are you sure the tests actually check that those bits of logic are doing the right thing? I've had Claude et al. write me plenty of tests that exercise things and then explicitly swallow errors and pass.

What's your prediction: Proportionally fewer, same, or more people hurt, compared to the first time?

Are you sure of that? For years now I think Amazon and Apple have an agreement where only Apple or Apple-approved third-party vendors can sell Apple products on Amazon?

https://9to5toys.com/2018/11/09/apple-and-amazon-deal-iphone... https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/apple-pumps-up-its-amazon-l...

(I think there may be a few other top-tier brands who get this special treatment from Amazon.)

The replies to this thread cannot be serious, on a web forum populated—I thought—primarily by technologists. Surely you all remember the variations on, "If you make encryption illegal then only criminals will have encryption"?

The next step will surely be to make use of communication programs that law enforcement cannot read illegal, right? The police find some person who has committed a crime, caught in the ways that criminals are usually caught, such as with forensics, or simply with the guns and drugs in the boot of their car. Then they can see what forms of communication this person was using, and who was using it with them. At that point, it doesn't matter what those other people were doing: The use of banned encryption technology is the crime. You can roll them up for that, or use evidence of this crime to justify further intrusion into their meatspace lives. And so it goes, on up the chain of a criminal organization. Theoretically, at least.

I don't like this, I don't support this, but as has been said elsewhere in this thread: Let's not pretend this is some insurmountable problem for a government who has already shown an appetite for surveillance.

Does https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherlock_(software)#Sherlocked... count? (Edit: Missed I wasn't the first to post this in a sibling.)

I was under the impression that, at least for models without "reasoning", asking them to be terse hampered their ability to give complete and correct answers? Not so?

Dave Plummer, a former Microsoft Windows engineer, also did a video on this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qe1ltXdKMow

I think https://github.com/threeplanetssoftware/apple_cloud_notes_pa... might do the trick. This is "user friendly" as long as you are a programmer or work in digital forensics. :D

Can you clarify, are you sympathetic of the person who thinks they wouldn't get an answer from the other team, or are you saying the person was wrong to not just ask the other team?

Asking since I've been in the situation many a time where the other team is too busy to reply in a timely fashion, and/or they don't even know the answers to my question, so I end up having to reverse engineer it.

I have to say that I am worried that, by taking myself out of the loop for the 99%, I'm going to get worse at the 1% of things that occasionally fall into my lap because the LLM can't seem to do them. I think software engineering is a skill that is "use it or lose it", like many others.

There's also the question of whether I will enjoy my craft if it is reduced to, say, mostly being a business analyst and requirements gatherer. Though the people paying me probably don't care very much about that question.

Unfortunately, Overcast's update towards the tail of last year ruined it for me and many others. It no longer functions reliably in my experience.

Thanks for your comment. I agree with a lot of what you said, in particular that trying to have it both ways (hybrid) often ends up with everyone being frustrated, in my experience.

I want to say very clearly that I don't doubt that "grift and fraud" happens. What percentage of the workforce are engaged in this grift? If you have 100 remote workers in your average IT shop at BigCo, how many of them do you think are truly running a scam that would never pass if they were in person? My guess is 3 or less, but that's just a guess.

In case it's not obvious, what I'm working towards is: If 3% of your workforce is engaged in grift, but a lot of the other 97% are happier and more productive, is it worth pissing off a substantial portion of that 97% just to shut down the 3%?

> The majority of the quality of life improvements are really about time freedom. You’d get most of it by giving employees sufficient paid time and allowing them to use it.

This leaves out one of the main things to like about WFH for many (most?) Americans, at least: I get to avoid wasting 30–90 minutes of my day in a stressful commute that comes with its own share of expenses.

But what if you also like the people you work with?

Or, to flip that around a bit, what if you hire people who are both competent and interesting/pleasant to be around?

Congratulations on your launch! But I confess that I am really confused. This sounds exactly like Aider, but closed source and it's locked into a single LLM API? I just watched you use it, and looks a lot like Aider too? Why would I use this over Aider?

I've seen people say "you don't have to add files to Codebuff", but Aider tells me when the LLM has requested to see files. I just have to approve it. If that bothers you, it's open source, so you could probably just add a config to always add files when requested.

Aider can also run commands for you.

What am I missing?

For people on macOS, the free app Aiko on the App Store makes it easy to use Whisper, if you want a GUI: https://sindresorhus.com/aiko

I struggle to understand why people are so toxic with chat in video games. I don't go to the supermarket, or even the bar and hear people just casually chatting about "who hates [racial slur]?"

There's John Gabriel's Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory, which says that if you give normal people anonymity and an audience then they become (let's call them) assholes. I feel that, in order to buy this, you must accept that there are a surprisingly large number of assholes, much larger than I want to believe.

Are the number of racist idiots just much greater amongst Gamers™? (To be clear, I play a lot of video games myself. I prefer to believe I am not a racist.)

I'd love to say that there are a lot more young people playing video games, and they're just trying to be edgy, but I had a chat with some guy who was talking about getting his appliances repaired by "lazy [racial slur]" people. That's probably not a fourteen year old, right? I've seen that a lot.

I understand that it probably just takes one or two people per game to make the chat unbearable, but if I'm on a team with six or eight people, and I consistently get at least one of these fucking idiots per match, isn't that still an uncomfortably high percentage of the population?

Better also put a second camera facing the eyes to make sure the player isn't looking at e.g. a radar monitor just past the game monitor, or something in their lap. Apparently some cheating streamers will put a camera behind them precisely to show their keyboard/mouse/monitor, but then they'll put a phone or small tablet in their lap or off to the side that has radar/wallhack kind of stuff running on it.

I think the rise of streamers and Internet personalities has incentivized many present day cheaters. You're more likely to strike it big—become popular, get paid—if you're good at these games. There is no shortage of YouTube videos showing streamers getting caught on stream cheating.

I haven't confirmed this, but I would expect that creating E2EE chat that doesn't follow this new law would itself be prosecutable? Now criminals can be picked up for merely using secure chat, if the government can't easily get them for human trafficking/drug trafficking/whatever. Reminds me of how the twentieth century US gangster Al Capone was prosecuted for tax evasion.

Is that "Guided Access"? https://support.apple.com/en-afri/guide/ipad/ipada16d1374/ip...

So the equivalent for software engineering is peer reviews?

> Education as a domain has identified key performance metrics for teacher evaluation and has come up with a method of collection they can point to which always results in useful data.

Can you please elaborate on this? My impression was that judging teachers is actually fairly hard. See, for example, push-back on standardized testing.

The most useful metric I can imagine is where the students are in some number of years, but the obvious (to me) problems are

1. Takes years 2. Lots of confounding factors

I share this viewpoint (is that ironic?), but it's almost entirely unhelpful when it comes time to make decisions, particularly decisions as a society or within a government, right? One powerful person's subjective reality that "all people who look like X should be executed" can most likely become the "subjective reality" of those X people real quick.

Do I correctly understand by your comment that you think there was a foreign intelligence service that did not already know MI6 employed female agents?

Should we consider the possibility that

1. Google's best people are not working on the YouTube team, or at least not on this part of it

and/or

2. The YouTube code base may be so gnarly after all these years that they are truly having trouble fixing this