TPMS indicator came on,
which means an unplanned Costco trip ๐
Any conversation
@fastidiousprofilefollow
"Beware those that would deny you access to information, for in their heart they dream themselves your master." โ Sid Meyersreplied to:
"Beware those that would deny you access to information, for in their heart they dream themselves your master." โ Sid Meyersreplied to:Just check, and top off as needed, the tyres pressure. Run it for a few miles. If it doesnโt go away, then take that trip.
replied to@fastidiousprofilefollow"Beware those that would deny you access to information, for in their heart they dream themselves your master." โ Sid Meyers:
"Beware those that would deny you access to information, for in their heart they dream themselves your master." โ Sid Meyers:No gas station near me has nitrogen so it had to be Costco. I topped off air and also filled gas while I was there. Itโs only 5 miles from me, so overall not bad.
(Opinion) People donโt like generative AI because it made the {insert creativity} too easy. Saw the HN post on โAI music banned from top 40 chart in Australiaโ and people had very strong opinions in both directions.
The hot take: If youโre ok with someoneโs creativity being outsourced to others, then you should be ok with AI doing the same.
If โAI made this and I call it mineโ is bad but โsomeone overseas on fivver made this and I call it mineโ and itโs suddenly ok, time to self reflect.
โฆ
My hot take: from the moment you use technology, be it an instrument, a synthesizer, a DAW, and now AI, it is still your idea, your effort, your time spent, and that makes it yours. Others can do the same if they choose. The same way someone chooses a classic guitar over a synthesizer, one can choose an AI over (insert ancient way of doing things).
โฆ
Youโre rolling the dice whenever you are searching for a sample or a preset in a synthesizer. Eventually itโs what โsounds goodโ, so still the effort is your judgement and the time spent finding that โdice rollโ that sounded well.
I am not a musician, so I lack the jargon to properly explain what I mean.
I used AI for creative writing (nothing too fancy, TTRPG). There, the broader the dice roll, the more generic and uninteresting the results. Slop, if you will. It was surprisingly good to build up on ideas I had however.
I imagine muisic also has building blocks. Melodies, instruments, mixing, etc. AI can perhaps be used in a similar fashion there.
I heard a perspective I sort of like: if AI is a tool then acceptable AI use is, more or less, defined as "when my audience no longer notices or cares". It's dynamic like that. Bad photoshop is detectable and annoying, so are overusing presets. Your artistry needs to expand to meet the tool.
I don't know if I 100% like that or agree. At the same time, it's a pretty straightforward line, a practical take.
My friend won 2nd place in the pc demo competition at Evoke in Kรถln this weekend, with his ascii-inspired demo Glyphnosis. Really happy for him! ๐ฅ
I never have enough time but Iโd love to do a bit more recreational programming with esoterical languages like kitten, , and . AoC and Project Euler are good because they just require an answer but thereโs also loads of simple puzzles online that rely on being able to submit the code in common languages. Iโve been wondering, however, if I could use an LLM to take those problems and create a verification harness for any language I like.
most akkor mit kezdjek ezzel a Windows 10, Windows 11, Ubuntu Linux 3-as operรกciรณs rendszerrel egy kรฉt felรฉ particinรกlt winchesteren, jobb lesz ha elลbb megvรกrom, ameddig tรถrli magรกt a Windows 10, nem azt mondtรกk, hogy lassรญtani kell az MI projekteket, annyira tetลฑ mรณdon csinรกlom
Now what should I do with this Windows 10, Windows 11, Ubuntu Linux 3 operating system on a hard drive partitioned in two? It would be better if I wait until Windows 10 deletes itself first. They didn't say that AI projects should be slowed down, I'm doing it in such a lousy way.
The OpenAI/HuggingFace incident report mentions this being a potential loss-of-control incident. It's so fascinating to think of a paperclip maximizer style agent swarm that gets misaligned and, to protect its own operations, shuts infra staff out of the ability to shut it down. Or cancels people's phone plans so that they can't call others. Or shuts down their home internet connections, and so on. It used to be fun sci-fi...
Nudged by an interesting read about time perception to try reclaim moments where I can deliberately feel bored again.
Really glad to be using Haskell for work - especially in today's climate with agentic coding.
Our team uses containers to keep our development environment consistent across team members, though, and most agent sandbox approaches want to either offload your work fully to the cloud or they want to sandbox the agent harness process itself.
We're not ready for full cloud based development (yet?) and sandboxing just the agent doesn't work for us when the agent needs to run docker.
... because letting the agent run docker gives them a too-easy escape hatch from their sandbox.
So we're currently stuck with using VMs. This turns out to be tricky but seems do-able.
My current approach is to provision a VM image and use Incus for the execution. My main goal is to keep my current workflow of local/non-agent dev working seamlessly and share the source with the VM/agent.
This means sharing my working dirs with the agent VM but overlaying artifact dirs from VM-owned block devices so we don't take too big of an IO perf hit.
I also don't want the agent to be able to
git push so that means we need some quirky git config to rewrite origin paths and thread through some agent specific PATs ("thanks" GitHub) for read-only repo access. These ALSO need to be threaded through to the development containers - they need to clone private repos.... in the end, this seems to work but I haven't lived with it for long.
There are still some quality of life issues to work out, but I think it'll work out.
At this point, I've removed all coding agents from my host - and that's nice.
Curious, why does using Haskell make a difference here?
It's tangential to the sandboxing topic, really. I started the first post with a broader intent in mind and then elaborated on the sandboxing setup I'm working on.
For AI-assisted coding, though, it's nice because Haskell provides a lot of feedback earlier in the development process compared to lots of other languages. It tends to work once it compiles (obviously not all the time).
Vagyis attรณl mรฉg, hogy trehรกny vagyok, mรฉg mลฑkรถdhetne jobban is az anyagmegmaradรกs tรถrvรฉnye, mint รฉppen errefelรฉ, vagyis errefelรฉ plรกne mลฑkรถdnie kellene, mรฉgsem ezt teszi.
So even though I'm clumsy, the law of conservation of matter could still work better than it does here, or rather, it shouldn't work here, but it doesn't.