> Note: Admins have limited oversight of ‘Skills’, as Skills in Copilot Cowork are automatically loaded from a specific path in a user’s OneDrive.

I feel this part is a bit disingenuous. We have full control over the sharepoint containers which house users personal onedrives. We actively scan them and prevent a lot of files from getting in them. That being said, it's still a fair point, because a "skill" could basically be a text file.

I think few people would want to use an ORM for the stuff you use Go for, but there are things like SQLC which can generate a lot of your "dynamic DB magic" without actually being a real dependency. You can set SQLC up to run in a container in a completely isolated environment, and then use the output, but you can frankly also just maintain the SQL which frankly isn't that different than using an ORM once you've set up the automation with ridicilously strict policies.

We use Go for some of our more vital backend parts. We mainly use Python for entirely different reasons, but since we're an energy company it's nice to have a standard library that can do everything without any sort of external dependencies. It's not because we have some sort of "not invented here" fetish, it's because we have to write and maintain a literal fuckton of complaince documents for every external dependency we use and it's already a full time job for just for Python in our information security department.

I haven't really used any other Copilot product in a while since they were so bad compared to our other corporate options, but I'm rather impressed with Cowork inside it. Exactly because we can actually use it without breaking any EU laws.

Technically we're using Copilot and we're playing for it through Microsoft licenses, but it's using Opus 4.7. Even before this, most of our custom agents within m365 copilot were one of the GPT models.

Or maybe you're right and they want their developers to use the copilot models.

I have no doubt that Renault could pay ChatGPT to get it to recommend people buying lunch boxes. For all I know there might be a bunch of eco friendly "European produced" lunch boxes with compartments and the LLM recommended me the three which fit the needs I described because those companies paid for it. I didn't find any of them on Google though, that was all Temu resales.

I can search for google and find nothing, or I can use a non-login on chatgpt and get several options. It found me some French made lunchboxes that are being made by a car company (I think it was renault but I honestly can't remember) while every result on google was basically temu resales by "companies" that were basically registered to some private adress here in Denmark. I guess I'm an early adopter, and I'm sure LLM's will be ruined by advertising and hidden algorithms, but right now, I really don't see the point of traditional search engines.

We have whatever AI is in teams transcribe every meeting, and it's scaringly good at it. It's also extremely good at sumerizing or finding things from pervious meetings when tasked. One disadvantage in this, is that I can see how stupid I sound on writing. I'll go "yeah, hmm, yeah, that's, yeah", but it really is pretty good.

I assume we're going to see a massive increase in AI with this Cowork inside the Microsoft client. We actually have a better tool available through a librechat where you can create and configure your own agents with the same filesystem access to your one drive, and a lot more tools and models than just Claude. Almost nobody has been capable of figuring out how to use it though, so they've been using the regular office365 copilot and it sucks so bad that a lot of people stopped beliving in AI.

It's ironic that Microsoft fumbling the ball on AI, but being very good at enterprise customers (especially non-IT) means that they'll likely be the company which is going to sell us AI tools that people will actually use. I have no idea why it's so hard for people to pick up the Librechat tool we're given access to through our equity fund. It's quite litterally a copy of ChatGPT where you can point-and-click configure an agent, but we're seeing that even employees who use a lot of ChatGPT privately don't use this tool professionally. Meanwhile everyone has been capable of using the Microsoft thing (that I personally think is less user friendly since you will need to add your configuration files to every promt).

I don't usually go back to the original prompt. I've actually done it a few times in regards to the presentation, to get some refined images but usually I'll start a new prompt.

What I do to mitigate this is that I have fact checking agents configured to be extremely critical and non-biased on Opus, Gemini and GPT. Which are then handed the entire conversation to review it. Then it's handed off to a Opus agent which is setup to assume everything is wrong. After this, and if I'm convinced something is correct I'll hand the entire thing off to a sonnet agent, which is setup to go through the source material and give me a compiled list of exactly what I'll need to verify.

It's ridicilously effective, but I do wonder how it would work with someone who couldn't challenge to analytic agent on domain knowledge it gets wrong. Because despite knowing our architecture and needs, it'll often make conceptional errors in the "science" (I'm not sure what the English word for this is) of data architecture. Each iteration gets better though, and with the image generation tools, "drawing" the architecture for presentations from c-level to nerds is ridiclously easy.

I don't know where you live, but around where I live in Denmark you'd fail for not using AI at a senior interview in a lot of places. Even places which aren't exactly AI fans use AI to some extend.

The biggest challenge we face right now is figuring out how you create developers who have enough experience to know how to use the AI tools in a critical manner. Especially because you're typically given agents for various taks, which are already configured to know how we want things to be written.

As you say it's limited, but that can be both good and bad.

The key point is the partner companies. Almost nobody is actually running their own clouds the way they would with various 365 products, AWS or Azure. They buy the cloud from partners, similar to how they used to (and still do) buy solutions from Microsoft partners. So if you want to "sell cloud" you're probably going to struggle unless you get some of these onboard. Which again would probably be hard because I imagine a lot of what they sell is sort of a package which basically runs on VM's setup as part of the package that they already have.

Not being able to feel that it's turned on is basically the primary feature of a laptop for me. I've wanted to switch my personal device to linux for a while, but there just... isn't... one. I know I could run linux on the macbook, but the point here is that there is nothing which compares, not even at higher prices.

I can't say that I know anything about Iran, but if we were to close our straits off so you couldn't enter the north sea from the baltic sea then our navy would rapidly deploy various different mines that lay on the bottom on the shallower parts and control the shipping lanes with things like suicide drones. I imagine Iran would do something similar, only they've probably been preparing for it a lot more than we have.