anus
@anus@lemmy.world
- Comment on Cloudflare built an oauth provider with Claude 4 days ago:
- I’m not really interested in trying to burn anyone and despite my nuanced understanding of the Luddites, I do think dismissing a Luddite take in the context of technological progress is legitimate
- I care about ethics and governance too but I live in a capitalist society and I’m here to discuss the merits of a technology
- Comment on My AI Skeptic Friends Are All Nuts 4 days ago:
This is a pretty good take imo
Like AI, IoT is an important and lasting technology
But too many businesses and products jumped on a misguided bandwagon to pull stupid uniformed VC money
- Comment on Cloudflare built an oauth provider with Claude 4 days ago:
You should look into how Dieselgate worked
I don’t think you understand my take
I guess that makes it a bad analogy
- Comment on My AI Skeptic Friends Are All Nuts 5 days ago:
Replace AI with Excel in your argument and repeat it again. Do you see how silly you sound?
- Comment on My AI Skeptic Friends Are All Nuts 5 days ago:
If this dev doesn’t do it, the next one will
This dev is analytical enough to understand basic incentive modeling and game theory. Capitalism is a race to the bottom no less now than it always was.
- Comment on My AI Skeptic Friends Are All Nuts 5 days ago:
This is a brilliant take. Whoever designed my car’s screen system can kick rocks
- Submitted 5 days ago to technology@lemmy.world | 24 comments
- Comment on Cloudflare built an oauth provider with Claude 5 days ago:
I think this take undervalues the AI. I think we self select for high quality code and high quality engineers
But many of us would absolutely gawk at something like Dieselgate. That is real code running in production on safety critical machinery.
I’m basically convinced that Claude would have done better
- Comment on Cloudflare built an oauth provider with Claude 5 days ago:
Agreed. It creates a new normal for what the engineer needs to actually know. In another comment I claimed that the same was true at the advent of stack overflow
- Comment on Cloudflare built an oauth provider with Claude 5 days ago:
Agreed, and yet the AI accelerated the project
- Comment on Cloudflare built an oauth provider with Claude 5 days ago:
I hear you, and there’s merit to the concerns. My counter is
The same was true at the Advent of books, the Internet, and stack overflow It’s Luddite to refuse progress and tools based on an argument about long term societal impact. The reality is that capitalism will choose the path of least resistance
- Comment on Cloudflare built an oauth provider with Claude 5 days ago:
Quoting from the repo:
This library (including the schema documentation) was largely written with the help of Claude, the AI model by Anthropic. Claude’s output was thoroughly reviewed by Cloudflare engineers with careful attention paid to security and compliance with standards. Many improvements were made on the initial output, mostly again by prompting Claude (and reviewing the results). Check out the commit history to see how Claude was prompted and what code it produced.
“NOOOOOOOO!!! You can’t just use an LLM to write an auth library!”
“haha gpus go brrr”
In all seriousness, two months ago (January 2025), I (@kentonv) would have agreed. I was an AI skeptic. I thoughts LLMs were glorified Markov chain generators that didn’t actually understand code and couldn’t produce anything novel. I started this project on a lark, fully expecting the AI to produce terrible code for me to laugh at. And then, uh… the code actually looked pretty good. Not perfect, but I just told the AI to fix things, and it did. I was shocked.
To emphasize, this is not “vibe coded”. Every line was thoroughly reviewed and cross-referenced with relevant RFCs, by security experts with previous experience with those RFCs. I was trying to validate my skepticism. I ended up proving myself wrong.
Again, please check out the commit history – especially early commits – to understand how this went.
- Submitted 5 days ago to technology@lemmy.world | 21 comments
- Comment on I am disappointed in the AI discourse 1 week ago:
while you were parroting AI sheep I was studying the blade ah comment
- Comment on I am disappointed in the AI discourse 1 week ago:
Do you think that human communication is more than statistical transformation of input to output?
- Comment on I am disappointed in the AI discourse 1 week ago:
Try asking ChatGPT if you’re confused
- Comment on I am disappointed in the AI discourse 1 week ago:
Oh no, not my public image!
- Comment on I am disappointed in the AI discourse 1 week ago:
The irony of focusing on my username when logical coherence is in question
- Comment on I am disappointed in the AI discourse 1 week ago:
Reality, where observation precedes perception
- Comment on I am disappointed in the AI discourse 1 week ago:
Not only is Steve right that ChatGPT writes better than the average person (which is indeed an elitist asshole take), ChatGPT has better logical reasoning than the average lemmy commenter
- Submitted 1 week ago to technology@lemmy.world | 28 comments
- Comment on What could go wrong? 2 weeks ago:
Ahh yes the random rolling stone article that refutes the point
Let’s revisit the list, shall we?
- Comment on A cheat sheet for why using ChatGPT is not bad for the environment 5 weeks ago:
Stoic desire to be informed and to be a force of good for others with like intentions
- Comment on A cheat sheet for why using ChatGPT is not bad for the environment 5 weeks ago:
I’m not familiar with the term
- Comment on A cheat sheet for why using ChatGPT is not bad for the environment 5 weeks ago:
🆗
- Comment on A cheat sheet for why using ChatGPT is not bad for the environment 5 weeks ago:
What makes this a bullshit take? Focusing attention on actual problems is a great way to make progress
- Comment on A cheat sheet for why using ChatGPT is not bad for the environment 5 weeks ago:
I think I’m on board with arguing against how LLMs are being owned and managed, so I don’t really have much to say
- Comment on A cheat sheet for why using ChatGPT is not bad for the environment 5 weeks ago:
I don’t understand the nature of your question
- Comment on A cheat sheet for why using ChatGPT is not bad for the environment 5 weeks ago:
-
Have you read the post?
-
If you’d like to refute the content on the grounds of another scientist, can you please provide a reference? I will read it
-
- Comment on A cheat sheet for why using ChatGPT is not bad for the environment 5 weeks ago:
I don’t think this answers the question