Would it be possible to add "Best Value" / "best average performance per dollar" type thing?

Your github research/ links are an interesting case of this. On one hand, late AI adopters may appreciate your example prompts and outputs. But it feels like trivially reproducible noise to expert LLM users, especially if they are unaware of your reputation for substantive work.

The HN AI pushback then drowns out your true message in favor of squashing perceived AI fluff.

Solving the business need has precedence over technical correctness.

Satisfying "what I think the requirements are" without considering the business need causes most code rework in my experience.

It's not obvious to me that this is a good idea. LLMs are trained on human-readable text.

The author notes that non-reasoning LLMs struggle with these SKFs. Maybe that's a hint that human readable summaries would perform better? Just a guess.

Or perhaps a vector store?

What a horrible thing to say. I can't speak for "goons" other than myself, but I have no hidden agenda when I flag the multitude of one-sided propaganda stories flooding HN about how horrible President Trump and DOGE are.

I find the resulting discussions to be hyperbolic, FUD-invoking, divisive and one-sided - as evidenced by your insults to half of U.S. voters - offering little to no discourse of value.

I have no idea which side "started it", but where we've landed isn't useful.

This is why I flag all articles on DOGE/etc, because genuine conversation is assumed to be in bad faith.

Expecting someone to read an article having an obvious propaganda hit-piece title like "DOGE as a National Cyberattack" is silly.

Would you read an article titled "technology is the mark of the beast" and take your time to debate its merits?

I personally hold the belief that DOGE and president Trump are acting in good-faith to keep his campaign promises as best as they're able, in a messy and tumultuous environment.

At the same time, I have a lot of empathy for the great number of people that are afraid and hurting right now for a multitude of reasons. People are facing food/job/business insecurity, genuine threats to various core ideological beliefs, an environment of fear and uncertainty for many affected people, threats to the desired direction of our laws and societal moral compass, etc. I hurt for those affected, and I do what I can within my spheres of influence to help.

I don't see why we can't have an honest conversation with each other without assuming that the other is operating in bad-faith. I think BOTH sides should stop using propaganda, and start LISTENING to each other, that eventually we might determine paths forward together without cancelling each other.

If these are the topics that you feel define the "right", it's no wonder society is confused how this administration was elected.

Wow. You don't need to be very right leaning to feel the complete opposite. I'm simply amazed someone could feel that way, as nearly all media is very left-leaning (to my perspective).

I like the energy we get when we work in the same space. I like being able to look people in the eye when discussing challenging or emotional topics. I like being able to brainstorm together at will, and use the whiteboards. I like seeing our office space we pay for being used by more than just 2 people. I enjoy our staff lunches and getting to know each other socially. Most people have a <10m commute in our small town, so travel time isn't a big deal.

Half our company is remote, and the other half work from home most days. But I'd prefer we all be local and in the office ideally. There, I said it.