• 1 Post
  • 23 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 3rd, 2023

help-circle
  • Totally fair question. One of my go-to examples is for a lot of data visualization stuff, just having an LLM spit out basic graphs with the parameters in the function call. Same with mock-ups of basic user interfaces. I’m not a front-end person at all, and I usually want something basic and routine (but still time consuming), like CRUD or something, so just prompting for that and getting a reasonably decent product is a helpful time saver.

    For anything more than basic stuff, I don’t think I’ve ever gotten more than a single small function that I then verify line by line.


  • astronaut_sloth@mander.xyztoProgramming@programming.devWe mourn our craft
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    26 days ago

    People who say they code faster with an LLM just blindly accept the given answer, maybe with a quick glance and some simple testing. Not in depth code review, which is hard and costs time.

    It helps me code faster, but I really only outsource boilerplate to an LLM. I will say it also helps with learning the syntax for libraries I’m unfamiliar with just in that I don’t have to go through several pages of documentation to get the answers I need in the moment. The speed-up is modest and nowhere near the claims of vibe coders.



  • Everyone should have a strong base in STEM and the humanities. It irks me to no end when STEM majors can’t write, communicate, or understand a wider historical context just as it irks me when humanities majors claim to not understand basic algebra or scientific concepts. It’s fine to have a preference, but an expert engineer should have a passing familiarity with philosophy and ethics, just as a historian should have a passing familiarity with scientific laws and mathematics.

    Then there’s business majors who have no familiarity with anything at all. If I had my druthers, “business school” wouldn’t even be an option at a university.







  • Yeah, it’s not technically impossible to stop web scrapers, but it’s difficult to have a lasting, effective solution. One easy way is to block their user-agent assuming the scraper uses an identifiable user-agent, but that can be easily circumvented. The also easy and somewhat more effective way is to block scrapers’ and caching services’ IP addresses, but that turns into a game of whack-a-mole. You could also have a paywall or login to view content and not approve a certain org, but that only will work for certain use cases, and that also is easy to circumvent. If stopping a single org’s scraping is the hill to die on, good luck.

    That said, I’m all for fighting ICE, even if it’s futile. Just slowing them down and frustrating them is useful.







  • This is why I believe scientists should be required to take liberal arts classes; especially related to written and spoken language.

    And yes, I also think liberal arts students should be required to take some level of hard STEM classes (not watered-down “libarts-compatible” stuff, but actual physics, chemistry, biology, etc) as well.

    Yes to both points! I’m eternally grateful to my high school AP English teachers for teaching me how to write and communicate.

    My somewhat unpopular opinion is that we’d be better off as a society if everyone in college took “real” STEM and liberal arts classes. The STEM folks can understand the why and societal implications of what they study (as well as just communication), and the liberal arts types can learn a bit about how the world actually works in a concrete way.

    Unfortunately, I’ve been continually struck by how incurious people are. I get that everyone has their interests, but that shouldn’t be to the exclusion of all other study. So, I don’t think this will happen. :/





  • The original paper itself, for those who are interested.

    Overall, this is really interesting research and a really good “first step.” I will be interested to see if this can be replicated on other models. One thing that really stood out, though, was that certain details are obfuscated because of Sonnet being proprietary. Hopefully follow-on work is done on one of the open source models to confirm the method.

    One of the notable limitations is quantifying activation’s correlation to text meaning, which will make any sort of controls difficult. Sure, you can just massively increase or decrease a weight, and for some things that will be fine, but for real manual fine tuning, that will prove to be a difficulty.

    I suspect this method is likely generalizable (maybe with some tweaks?), and I’d really be interested to see how this type of analysis could be done on other neural networks.