Mastodon Feed: Posts

Boosted by aredridel@kolektiva.social ("Mx. Aria Stewart"):
mhoye@cosocial.ca wrote:

An argument I've been stewing on for a while is that the place stochastic language modelling will be most effective as a dowsing rod for _classes_ of both errors and overlooked needs and growth-paths. I think that @cwebber is partly correct but that attacker/defender is a reactive framing; not wrong, but: narrow.

We have a mirror here that can show us ourselves, reflected in patterns. What would we want to see if we could see anything? How would we change?

https://social.coop/@cwebber/116335331872866600

dysfun@treehouse.systems ("gaytabase") wrote:

5 days of not smoking. starting to breathe a little easier, which is to say breathing at all up to a point.

very mixed feelings tbh, but inclined to consider this is a permanent change now.

Boosted by aredridel@kolektiva.social ("Mx. Aria Stewart"):
mnl@hachyderm.io ("mnl mnl mnl mnl mnl") wrote:

@aredridel one thing that grounds me is that this is mostly an online keyboard-driven debate. Normal people in the real world a) don't give a shit where the software comes from b) are delighted when you build them a little tool that solves their problem c) feel empowered when they realize they can build bigger things.

And now that software copyright is dead I legit dgaf anymore. I'm not going to launder opensource software for the sake of pretending I made something, but I'm sure as hell going to launder anything proprietary/company backed I run across.

legit where is the "hack the planet" spirit? opensource has been coopted by bigtech for decades now, every opensource project landing page looks like a fucking startup, but the stuff llm-assisted devs do is _weird af_ and quirky and creative. And usually deeply human, mirroring the creators personality, which is so ironic.

Boosted by aredridel@kolektiva.social ("Mx. Aria Stewart"):
mnl@hachyderm.io ("mnl mnl mnl mnl mnl") wrote:

@aredridel as if copyright as a hack to open more sourcecode through the GPL has worked in the last 20 years. All I've seen in practice is that there companies will rather build shitty in-house replacements of GPL'd software than open any of their own source.

I am absolutely flabbergasted, as someone who wants everybody to get value out of their computational devices, to get them to do what they want when they want on their own terms, and seeing how LLMs facilitate exactly the kind of "a single html file with local storage application that i share with my friends" malleable software so often dreamed of, to then be "but i have copyright on this pedestrian piece of software that presumably is 'remixed' by LLMs so no." and then attacking everybody studying and using the tools as "hubris driven tech bros wanting to keep their toys" when no, I want everybody to play with my toys.

dysfun@treehouse.systems ("gaytabase") wrote:

hi i'm nilegreen and this week i'll be synthesising computrons out of some dangerous chemicals and last week's jam.

dysfun@treehouse.systems ("gaytabase") wrote:

ludicrous as in wouldn't really be acceptable to most people rather than really good, obviously.

dysfun@treehouse.systems ("gaytabase") wrote:

c'mon, you knew i would have some absolutely ludicrous desktop setup, obviously.

dysfun@treehouse.systems ("gaytabase") wrote:

finally got around to putting a fan on my cpu cooler. it makes quite a difference....

Boosted by aredridel@kolektiva.social ("Mx. Aria Stewart"):
mnl@hachyderm.io ("mnl mnl mnl mnl mnl") wrote:

@aredridel definitely something driving me up the walls. The hype-AI and the anti-AI debate is... accepting the same framework that AI tools are labor-replacing thinking-replacing magical widgets. Either irredeemably bad, or unconditionally amazing.

It's however much easier to have a nuanced discussion with the hype-AI crowd, because by virtue of them using the tool are very aware of the current shortcomings of the technology and of the spectrum of skill using them.

aredridel@kolektiva.social ("Mx. Aria Stewart") wrote:

RE: https://mastodon.social/@danluu/116333185599071224

This. This is how it is.

Startups can ship slop faster than ever _and that is the correct decision for them for the most part_. If we structure business so that they are existentially constrained like they are, this is the correct answer for how they will behave.

And if we want real engineering, the tool isn't the problem, it's the incentives.

Boosted by aredridel@kolektiva.social ("Mx. Aria Stewart"):
danluu ("Dan Luu") wrote:

@regehr @ryan This matches what I hear from friends in industry.

I hear a lot of stories of projects where someone outsourced thinking to an LLM and spent days or weeks debugging something and not fixing it when applying a bit of human judgment would solve the problem. A friend of mine makes good money as a consultant who cleans up people's LLM-assisted messes.

On the flip side, the growth rate of startups is faster than ever because you can ship at previously impossible velocities.

Boosted by aredridel@kolektiva.social ("Mx. Aria Stewart"):
regehr ("John Regehr") wrote:

My own experience is that it’s not at all easy to get reasonable code out of even the latest LLMs. Makefiles and that sort of thing— easy peasy. Medium or larger code you’d actually maintain? Very tricky

Boosted by aredridel@kolektiva.social ("Mx. Aria Stewart"):
regehr ("John Regehr") wrote:

I’m not sure how to feel about this but I suspect it’s good news for CS types, it means all the managers and other random vibe coders aren’t really competition

Boosted by aredridel@kolektiva.social ("Mx. Aria Stewart"):
regehr ("John Regehr") wrote:

this spring I've been teaching undergrads to use LLM agents. my rationale for doing this was that it would give me a chance to covertly teach lots of real software engineering, which is what I've done.

meanwhile, I've been watching the students closely to try to figure out whether a coding agent is a leveling factor (reducing differences in effectiveness between different students) or an anti-leveling factor (amplifying differences). at this point I'm 99% sure it's the second thing.

aredridel@kolektiva.social ("Mx. Aria Stewart") wrote:

God I hate ending up defending these tools because some of the takes are _so damn bad_. Like you could not do better as a psyop to advertise these tools and cement the ideological foundations.

aredridel@kolektiva.social ("Mx. Aria Stewart") wrote:

I knew it was this way but it's really hitting me today how much the Open Source movement and copyright maximalism supplanted the idea of free software, and again how much the Free Software movement turned from a close ideological cousin of the remix and open culture movement into a culture of legalism. At the same time, copyright law itself has been extended to be near-immortal copyrights rather than brief monopolies to spur creation by enabling profit from creating works.

pzmyers@freethought.online ("pzmyers 🕷") wrote:

Trying to bomb a nation of over 90 million people into the stone age isn't going to happen, and ought not to be the purpose of a war. It's also not going to salvage his status here at home.

https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2026/04/02/yay-the-war-is-over/

Boosted by aredridel@kolektiva.social ("Mx. Aria Stewart"):
pluralistic@mamot.fr ("Cory Doctorow") wrote:

Youtube's notice-and-staydown system is Content ID, an incredibly baroque system that allows copyright holders (and people pretending to be copyright holders) to "claim" video and sound files, and block others from posting them. No one - not even the world's leading copyright experts - can figure out how to use this system to uphold copyright:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/06/27/nuke-first/#ask-questions-never

20/

Boosted by baldur@toot.cafe ("Baldur Bjarnason"):
aral@mastodon.ar.al ("Aral Balkan") wrote:

So Anthropic employees are using Claude Code to contribute AI-generated code to open source repositories and hiding the fact using their own internal “undercover mode”.

Totally trustworthy people.

(Any open source project that at the very least requires disclosure of AI-authored contributions should immediately ban Anthropic employees on principle.)

#AI #Anthropic #ClaudeCode #subterfuge

Boosted by baldur@toot.cafe ("Baldur Bjarnason"):
GossiTheDog@cyberplace.social ("Kevin Beaumont") wrote:

Probably going to get a viral blog out of this experience, I'm trying to report a 4tb exposed cloud bucket to a company using their responsible disclosure programme... but they replaced the people with a GenAI ticket system that refuses to discuss the case as it thinks exploring open buckets is unethical and against its rules.

dysfun@treehouse.systems ("gaytabase") wrote:

the first shitposter is believed to be marie antoinette. this of course quickly led to the first shitpost-related death as it was in particularly poor taste.

Boosted by baldur@toot.cafe ("Baldur Bjarnason"):
beep@follow.ethanmarcotte.com ("Ethan Marcotte") wrote:

“Your choice isn’t between risk and safety but different kinds of risk: choose well.”

I really needed to read @aworkinglibrary’s thoughts on finding our way out of workslop; maybe you do, too. https://everythingchanges.us/blog/mouthwords/

Boosted by dysfun@treehouse.systems ("gaytabase"):
0xabad1dea@infosec.exchange ("abadidea") wrote:

IT'S HAPPENING

GITHUB, THE FIRST ENTERPRISE CLOUD SOLUTION TO REACH ZERO NINES RELIABILITY

https://mrshu.github.io/github-statuses/

#github

Boosted by slightlyoff@toot.cafe ("Alex Russell"):
jaffathecake ("Jake Archibald") wrote:

I've been playing around with Chrome's experimental HTML-in-Canvas API (I use it to create my videos), and I wanted to see if I could make text-selection work on a curved surface by moving the underlying element around on pointermove. It works pretty well!

Live demo: https://random-stuff.jakearchibald.com/apps/curved-markup/ (needs Chrome Canary with the canvas-draw-element flag.

Source: https://github.com/jakearchibald/random-stuff/blob/main/apps/curved-markup/src/App/index.tsx#L113

Attachments:

• gifv: Some HTML mapped across a spherical-like object. Although the content is curved, text-selection and clicking links works fine.

baldur@toot.cafe ("Baldur Bjarnason") wrote:

Starting to see more LLM-using acquaintances who've spent the past three years ignoring every problem solemnly talk about "having concerns about the technology". Not many, but more.

Kinda wondering whether it's a critical mass thing (easy to ignore individual problems but not all the problems everywhere) or whether there was a single specific thing that soured them on it, leading them to see it differently.

But also don't really care why or how, just that they're finally listening.

dysfun@treehouse.systems ("gaytabase") wrote:

okay but thinking about ways haskell sucks got me thinking about what i should do if i ever decide to push a language out to the mass market.

dysfun@treehouse.systems ("gaytabase") wrote:

make ghc 10x faster

ahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahawhahahaha*cough*ahahaha*choke*

db@social.lol ("David Bushell 🪿") wrote:

blocked myself from social media for the Easter weekend

see you next week!

dysfun@treehouse.systems ("gaytabase") wrote:

see the mechanical turk in all its glory

baldur@toot.cafe ("Baldur Bjarnason") wrote:

“Mouthwords | everything changes”

https://everythingchanges.us/blog/mouthwords/

> We need to see the advent of workslop in the context of the technological aims of the last several decades, one of which has been to obfuscate the human labor involved in everything from driving to cooking to gathering