https://acceptmarkdown.com/status

[1] https://www.bottlenecklabs.com/blog/autonomously-run-busines...

I disagree with this article and find Opus 5 an absolute joy to work with. I just completed an 18,000 line branch with Opus 5 and ran into no issues. It generated clean code in the exact style of our code base, and tested every change.

Fable on the other hand is snarky and outputs walls of text as to why it shouldn't do what I'm asking it.

Opus 4.8 I accidentally went back to in an old chat, and I was frustrated in all the mistakes it made.

So yeah, use the model that works for you.

Really Apple.. No device inventory and off boarding process?

Because with a Premium Team seat I run 2-3 vscodes with Opus 4.8 Max all day and never seem to hit my limits.

What like a nefarious vscode extension, or npm or python library like we have seen many many times over the past 6 months.

I think you have some holes in your threat model..

PS. A simple VPN back to your static IP enables roaming.

You obviously haven't worked anywhere security sensitive.

I'm not talking about whether what Grok did is bad or good, I'm talking about protecting your private key and the servers you connect to.

An unencrypted private key is no different to an unencrypted password manager, and thats a fact. Dont store secrets in plain text.

The SSH port itself can be limited by IP in firewalls.

Finally, the SSH private key can be encrypted with a password.

Defense in depth is needed. Storing a ssh private key in plain text with no IP restriction is no different to having a password manager store your passwords in plain text on your HD.

I had never experienced this behaviour with Sonnet or Opus. It turned me off Fable for good. Possibly its the 'hacker' 'do anything to win' nature that makes it so good at hacking, but terrible just to talk to.

But the long term effects on your joints, even if you think you have perfect technique, its better to just get a wood splitter. We can do a whole winters wood in less than a day now, with minimal effort.

Main then has a nice single commit with a reference to the branch it came from if you wish to see how it developed. Why would we want to litter main with your 100 commits? You own your code, and if you wish to dig into why you did something in a commit, go look in your branch history.

In one example I switched to Fable in an existing Opus chat, so it had access to the context from Opus which wrote a data importer earlier. I asked it to fix a couple of bugs, and instead of putting the fixes where they should be where the data is imported, it wrote patch functions that did bulk updates at the end of the import.

Fable feels more like a hacker than a coder. Maybe its the way they designed it for security testing thats changed its rationale?

enable_nestloop = off here.

For us, joining many complex views quickly trips the planner up, so I'm really glad to see this.

> They break on upgrades.

The irony is so does the planner. I've seen queries working perfectly fine in older PG's suddenly run away in newer versions. So hints will actually bring stability.

Even with network monitoring, exfil to Github itself can be very hard to stop unless you SSL intercept and have very strict URL allow lists.

Best is to move away from Github, move to self hosted internal Gitlab/Forgejo and block Github completely.

We do, and thats why we use Postal [1].

The more SaaS applications that self-host email the better. It forces the big guys, ie Microsoft, to improve their blocklists and not lazily block entire ranges. Yes its work contacting them occasionally, but it keeps the internet open. The alternative is an internet where they control it all.

1. https://docs.postalserver.io/

You mean like how they moved from a perfectly legible and rememberable domain like office.com to the strange vanity domain m365.cloud.microsoft?