I don't know if retyping is the solution, but for me is clear that we need something additional to a terminal and a code editor. I envision a software that an agent can use and showcase to you how it did implement the changes and why.
The same way a colleague would do, focusing on the important bits, then ending with the trivial stuff. Something in between pair programing and code reviews.
Diffity has a “tour” feature that can be directed to explain a local code change. Walks you through the important bits of the change with explanations.
Right. I want an AI that sees my screen, sees my mouse cursor, has my audio transcript synced to the mouse movements, and it can similarly do TTS and and pointer movements or put things like circles and rectangles and background highlights on things while it talks, and slows down if I say so etc, like a human discussion partner.
I understand it like events + state machine type of approach.
Reacts only renders and emits events, and I guess the state machine imperatively will dictate to react what to render according to the result of executing whatever is in the state transition.
in the context of learning I think it's good to execute yourself then see what happens immediately, once you allow the agent to execute things, it tends to run several follow up commands when needed, an example from top of my head would be running a server that fails because the port is already in use, the agent will easily find the port and decide to kill it or not and then re-run the command, but if you run the command and see the error, then you get the chance to learn what's going on and how to fix it. You can still use the LLM to read the error and explain you why this happens, according to this guidelines.
And the killer killer issue is that even if you would manage to talk to them, their opinion will be shaped but what AI told them and AI opinion will always be perceived as superior, your real world experience and instinct will be disregarded quickly.
For some people it becomes more like a ritual, some groups of friends do it together as something social to talk about football, I think it leads in some degree to people paying attention and talking about lower rank matches :D
I've played a couple of times solo and in group but never sticked to me.
No related to the point, but what it did stick to me for one season was La Liga Fantástica from Marca ( a fantasy league on paper) when I was a child, because it had the data component, you had a budget to pick players etc, This was before we had internet broadly, if I remember correctly the paper would publish huge lists with the teams ranking or the players stats. But what I do remember was some of my best players like Zalazar :D
There are things that you can only explore and learn in those places, for obvious reasons.
I don't know his personal life goals but he's a great communicator and educator, if this decision makes him more up to date, and allows him to create even more relevant content then is something everyone will benefit. I understand the risks of being bias toward one company and not the other, but if you look at the content he created so far, he always talk principle first and specific tool later.
I think people here should give him the benefit of the doubt.
Alright, is just that your previous comments and some others sounded to me a bit too judgy, I had to re read these with a new interpretation:
> i wouldn't be surprised if he just becomes a glorified marketer for anthro.
> im also going to guess that whatever research he does ...
At first sounded like unnecessarily prejudging a person and his future efforts.
But if you say you meant everything out of respect for him, then I have to re read what you said , more as skepticism towards Anthropic than picking up on him at a personal level.
I guess what's behind is the sentiment that big companies are going to (or have already) cross ethical lines when it comes to survive and making revenue, and I can share the same concern easily. I think in this forum the majority would do.
I would just make that more explicit and separate the person from his choice, and his future work from how the company could use it, that would be a more respectful way in my view.
But is just my opinion! and I'm aware I'm might be picking on nuances that don't matter or being overly polite :D
FYI they also released FP8 quants, and those should be faster on your setup (we have the same). As long as you keep kv at 16bit, FP8 should be close-to-lossless compared to 16bit, but with more context available and faster inference speed.
That's what I though too, maybe I'm missing something or I don't fully get it.
But the human is always behind what's the difference if they go and sign up or tell an agent that they must sign up for you ?.
My best guess is that this a way of making a system talk to your agent without you knowing what they are talking about ? As a way of not exposing the real sign up method ?
Since it’s just used once, you can also just have an agent solve the captcha and then use the returned api key yourself. This has to be engagement bait.
