859 karma · joined August 12, 2018
> A hook is Koa-style middleware: it reifies an endomorphic continuation
> Five forms, each on tool.call;
But on the other hand uses distinctly human phrases like “one may” and “etc./e.g.” that I rarely see LLMs use. Not sure what to think.
Like some others have mentioned, one of my earliest thoughts was “how much of a hint was the LLM given about the bug?” I think if the prompt used was stated clearly/verbatim near the beginning of the article, that would probably dispel a good amount of the criticism.
> Please don't use HN primarily for promotion. It's ok to post your own stuff part of the time, but the primary use of the site should be for curiosity.
> and Chinese models are poised to take the lead.
makes it sound like the second part is a continuation of the first quote from the same source, but actually the second link is just some random person’s substack post from almost a year ago.
I actually disagree with this point a lot, as an IC. My manager shares his honest opinions with us, and I respect him more for it. It seems like the rest of the team feels the same.
I’ve had managers try to sell <obviously bad thing> as something good for the team, and it sucks. It feels like being gaslit. I think honest, open communication is a much better way to run a team. We’re all adults and professionals too; we can handle the truth.
> That's it. No rate limiting. No account lockout.
To me, if he confirmed that there’s no rate limiting on the auth API, this implies a scripted approach checking at least tens (if not more) of accounts in rapid succession.
It isn't a perfect fit, since the article talks a lot about the scientific method which doesn't apply super well to philosophy+math, but I think there are some strong parallels here.
> In 2020, the United States became a net exporter of petroleum for the first time since at least 1949. In 2022, total petroleum exports were about 9.52 million barrels per day (b/d) and total petroleum imports were about 8.33 million b/d, making the United States an annual net total petroleum exporter for the third year in a row.
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/oil-and-petroleum-produc...
Correct me if I’m wrong, but it sounds like this is just about a temporary injunction to give the employees their jobs back while the actual labor case gets decided? The lower court used the two part McKinney test to grant the injunction, and the Supreme Court said no, you have to use the four part Winter test like other district courts, go back and decide again.
Anecdotally, I recently got a simple blood test to keep an eye on something that’s been borderline in the past. Unbeknownst to me, my doctor ordered nearly 30 things to be checked in the blood panel, at $50-$100 a piece. Luckily my insurance negotiated a much lower price and covered most of it, but I can’t imagine paying $2,000+ just to check e.g. your cholesterol level.
I think the problem is alignment of incentives: for a doctor, over-testing has little to no negative consequences, but under-testing could lead to guilt due to a patient dying, loss of reputation because something was missed, lawsuits, etc.
As a society, is this how we should be using our limited medical resources? What if we made fewer xray machines and instead spent more on something like cancer screening? How many net lives could we save?