sunir

That's fair; I am not in the loop with indie games personally but I do know it's a golden age of creativity.

I have a text book called Hamlet on the Holodeck about how the machines could take imagination to greater heights.

Now it’s all about dopamine. Lower gutters.

Humans never change so I have hope things will correct and we dream again.

Yes, it's the September That Never Ended again. It's fun to complain about the good ol' days, but I'd rather face the world as it is and find the joy in it.

http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/S/September-that-never-ended... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September

The advantage of having so many ideas being tried and published is we are exploring the space of possibility faster, and so there's more to learn from. The disadvantage is that signal to noise is way down. Also, because the system is self-reflective and dynamic, there's a natural downward spiral as the common spaces get overrun and we cannot coordinate signal. The Tragedy of the Commons.

I guess I spent 10 years worrying about this in my MeatballWiki era in my 20s, and now I'm in my midlife crisis era and prefer to just have fun with the world that I have.

The large models are incredibly inefficient. We'll be squeezing them down for generations.

One is a cybernetic system. It has sensors, a controller, a decision system, goals, and actuators. Arguably it's alive, but I think the definition of cybernetics is sufficient because it's objective.

For someone paying nothing for something that costs nothing, you have way more than nothing to complain about. Not appropriate.

I suspect 1M token context is questionable value because of the secondary effect of burning quota vs getting work done.

I think the model select that let me choose 1M made sense because I could decide if I was working on large documents and compacting more often was more effective.

Exactly. A safe bet vs a great bet.

4 McDonalds. That’s a better way of measuring it.

Moore's Law.

We've had RAM shocks before. We nerds can't control the Wall Street or Virginians who like to break the world every so often for the lulz. However, a wobble on the curve doesn't change the curve's destination.

The hardware will change. We know that.

Computers get better and cheaper. That’s not a forever problem.

I think the mountain of things I don’t understand was already huge. It doesn’t stop me from getting a grip over the things I need to be responsible for and using tools to contain complexity irrelevant to me. Like many scientists have a stats person.

The risk is that civilization is over its skis because humans are lazy. Humans are always lazy. In science there’s a limit to bs because dependent works fail. In economics there’s a crash. In physics stuff breaks. Then there is a correction.

I am really enjoying this renaissance in CLI world applications. There's so much possible.

I'm working on a related challenge which is mounting a virtual filesystem with FUSE that mirrors my Mac's actual filesystem (over a subtree like ~/source), so I can constrain the agents within that filesystem, and block destructive changes outside their repo.

I have it so every repo has its own long-lived agent. They do get excited and start changing other repos, which messes up memory.

I didn't want to create a system user per repo because that's obnoxious, so I created a single claude system user, and I am using the virtual file system to manage permissions. My gmail repo's agent can for instance change the gmail repo and the google_auth repo, but it can't change the rag repo.

Edit: I'm publishing it here. It's still under development. https://github.com/sunir/bashguard

It doesn't force you go through risk modelling because by now most SOC2 platforms have templates you just fill in the blanks and sign off. Conversely, the auditors are paid by the company, so their incentive is to pass the audit so the client can get what it wants.

Because there's no adversarial pressure as a check and balance to the security, and AICPA is clearly just happy to take the fees, it's a hollow shirt. It's like this scene from The Big Short. https://youtu.be/mwdo17GT6sg?si=Hzada9JcdIPfdyFN&t=140

As usual, it's only people that care that force positive change. The companies that want good security will have good security. Customers who want good security will demand good security.

I am! I’ll reach out in another channel to connect.

It’s not surprising. There has been quite a bit of industrial research in how to manage mere apes to be deterministic with huge software control systems, and they are an unruly bunch I assure you.

You’re just a bag of meat. That is why it’s just math is an unsatisfying argument.

It’s not even an interesting question. Sentience has no definition. It’s meaningless.

People have needs that are being met. That is something we can meaningfully observe and talk about. Is the super stimulus beneficial or harmful? We can measure that.

Technodeterminism is a common feeling in paradigm shifting moments. Don’t forget who is at the helm of the change.

It’s called a library. It’s free. Plus you get to say microfiche which is fun. :)

It’s not insane. They are correct that is the point of civilization which carries information from generation to generation outside the oral tradition in a systematic organized reliable way.

Dubious. Ai psychosis is the opposite. It’s about being empowered to explore ideas much further but with a maladaptive tool designed to be an appeaser by reinforcement learning.

When was it not a cargo cult?

Qwen code has a free tier

Opencoder is bring your own model.

You get what you pay for so good luck.

You’re assuming most people using Claude code are senior engineers.

I think you have the law of supply and demand backwards.

The fund is called customers. The independent regulator is called the AICPA. It really comes down to who is paying attention

SOC2 is as useful as a privacy policy at protecting your data. It’s all humans following human incentives.

It’s 2026. Reading is not the problem any more. Culling obsolence is the problem.

My laws of existence:

Business. If the customer can’t feel it it doesn’t exist.

Ops. If it isn’t automated it doesn’t exist.

Product. If it isn’t documented it doesn’t exist.

Engineering. If it isn’t in code it doesn’t exist.

You have an opinion about security? Have you written a linter? Is it documented? Is it in the deployment pipeline? Do customers care?

If it’s only in your brain I don’t accept it and refer you back to the existence rules.

The only should is you should succeed in making the change wanted or needed by your customer or stakeholders or yourself. How you do it is a capital problem. Cheaper faster better is preferred.

Imagine saying the 30% rule is you must eat in 30% of the time or eat vegetarian 30% of the time. It’s missing the point.