we also launched Norma! :)
It checks AI-generated code for security, quality and maintainability while the agent is still working, rather than after a pull request opens. The output is deterministic. Here the demo link: portal.qualityclouds.ai/demo
Any conversation
what are ya'lls favorite wikipedia page?
I myself is partial to the 'variations' entry for high fives
Catastrophic interference is also a favorite Wikipedia page and concept. The thing is, it doesnโt only happen to artificial neural networks, Iโve had it happen to me a few times. Especially with pin numbers, newer pins overwriting old ones and Iโm always scared when Iโm having hard time remembering something that this catastrophic interference applied and now the information is gone from my brain.
setting up some of my workflows based on this writeup - ludwigabap.com/โฆ/on-my-personal-โฆof-the-tools-i-use/
Particularly a big fan of zellij amongst others
Also venturing into having agents enable more of my work - let us see how that goes.
working on permanent.sh a coding agent for the growing and seemingly permanent underclass of people that are left behind by the unbelievable pace of progress in ai
the big labs are fighting over felonybench (exploitbench) and google deepmind ceo left to work on drug discovery
ai coding feels like it has reached diminishing returns for me. luna is my default orchestrator, routing work by complexity. in practice, usage lands around 16% luna, 48% sol, 30% astra, and 6% terra. at this point, i care less about each new frontier release. the system already finds a capable model for the job. the frontier is moving beyond my day-to-day work, so iโm happy to settle into predictable models for a while.
Coding probably yeah, but still they are bad at generating novel information, new ideas and such. Theyโre also not very good at seeing the bigger picture, they will narrowly perform the task but theyโre not taking into account future revisions, which ends up in refactor after refactor in order to move forward.
@fastidiousprofilefollow
"Beware those that would deny you access to information, for in their heart they dream themselves your master." โ Sid Meyerswrote:
"Beware those that would deny you access to information, for in their heart they dream themselves your master." โ Sid Meyerswrote:Just started, and two made it to be block list. This is going well! :-D
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:Didn't realize there's a block list! Good to include, even when the point is minimalism.
@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:It is good it exists. โRegistrationโ is fairly open (and thatโs good!), which could make the platform prone to abuse (and thatโs bad).
I truly love the experience of using apps with rich, deeply interactive, beautifully animated, gorgeous user interfaces.
Then I see a beautiful text-based interface and something about it feels so natural, so inevitable, so perfectly clear, and I'm instantly captivated by its simplicity and clarity.
Hypertext is fascinating.
signals. thinking about shifting my mental framework to identify signals instead of waiting for concepts to be assembled. exploring the amount of energy and opportunities for distractions through the operations of processing what just happened and what is happening to short circuit latent and unnecessary systems. cut through the assembly processes and identify the raw signals. recognizing that naming these "raw signals" is misleading. maybe, shifting observability lower in the stack.
(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.