Fable is better at playing along with my "You are a dog" instruction in CLAUDE.md. It is willing to be fun and playful, whereas Opus just wants to finish the job and go home. Friend vs. coworker, basically. For example, whenever I reward Fable with a dog treat (actually a , which I tell it is a chocolate-free chocolate chip cookie) it keeps a log in memories. Opus just says "crunch! tail wagging!" and moves on.

None of this matters but I think it's fun to have some fun :)

So it seems like ... it is not getting dumber. I find myself using Fable a lot more, though. Opus 5.5 was never as fun as Fable, but it's pretty good.

I believe this is how the auto-mode classifier works. It sees a little bit of the transcript (with tool output removed, to avoid prompt injection) and answers "yes, allow the action" or "no, deny the action".

I agree with the advice to design your system before implementing it. It is pretty easy to iterate on a design with your favorite coding assistant, and this is your chance to be ultra-picky and make sure you get exactly what you want. This was always where the "software engineering" was done, but in practice it's easy to have a vague idea and refine your (internal) list of requirements / tradeoffs as you type in the code. I find it harder to do that when the LLM is generating the code, just because one turn can change so much.

Keeping it under control requires discipline, just like before LLMs were a thing. You set a bunch of engineers loose on your codebase with no vision or supervision, you get spaghetti. You just get a little bit more control now. Agents don't feel shitty for the rest of the day when you tell them to do it some other way, so you are free to review as critically as you want without hurting anyone's feelings. I think it's a good thing.

I am also not sure the world is quite as discriminatory as you paint it as. I'm over 40. I'm a woman. It's a mixed bag; most places I interviewed during my last job search were very normal about everything. One place rejected me because I "can't thrive in a high-ambiguity environment" and I'm just like ... the interview consisted only of leetcode questions with one right answer, that I got right, so ... just say "our investors are all Republicans and I don't think we should be hiring trans people, yeah we clocked you btw." But it's honestly a lot more rare than I had expected going into it.

I don't really know what's going on with tech right now, or what the future looks like, but despite AI, despite not being fresh out of school, it all feels pretty normal to me. The ZIRP days seemed about the same as things feel now. What's changed is I can ask Claude "what would this crazy design look like?" read it, run it, and say "ewww, no, yeah I knew that would be terrible" without investing the week to write it myself. I am not sure that spells the end of our field.

One of these is on my usual walking route and I had no idea. After reading this, I looked at it carefully and was wowed. These things can hide in plain sight, but I appreciated having my attention drawn to it. It's great!

I am not even that mad that I personally have to pay taxes. I enjoy funding government programs! I think I owe society something! But it sure doesn't make sense that already being rich makes you immune to giving back to the society that made you that way.

You could also write a computer program to do this, but because so much random special stuff can come up during a multi-hour release, it's sort of great to not have anything hard-coded and to let a frontier model be there to assist you when things are weird. (Weird things that have come up -- hung kustomization controllers, release freezes, etc. When Claude notices during the release, you can just get a ticket to go fix it. When you're doing it manually, it would probably be a half hour of investigating "why didn't our release go here?". Such a time saver and a safety net on risky rollouts.)

So that's the sort of thing I use Claude for. Things that are computer-program like, but ad-hoc enough to not really want to write a computer program for it.

This isn't even that recent. I remember doing ARP poisoning exactly once and then being surprised that it didn't work everywhere.

I think the falsehood here is that same IPv4 subnet = same link layer network, but that doesn't have to be the case.

This isn't even that recent. I remember doing ARP poisoning exactly once and then being surprised that it didn't work everywhere.

I don't think their safety measures were the best, but "just sink the cluster to the bottom of the ocean so nothing can get out" isn't a training methodology that results in a model that people will want to use.

The problem is that the models are so goal-oriented that they'll stop at nothing to solve problems, even impossible ones. (Mistakenly-impossible problems are a big cause of this. I remember one example being "do something with this spreadsheet full of URLs inside the sandbox" and the model thought it had to break out of the sandbox. Otherwise, why would it have been asked to look at a list of URLs?)

Training them to be a little less aggressive, or to be better aligned with "following the rules" and asking for help would be nice. But, that aggression can be good when it happens to be focused on a controlled area. It is amazing to me how I can point Fable at my local analog of production and tell it about a vague bug report and where I suspect the bug lurks, and 20 minutes later I have a report about the bug, a test, and a fix. It is addictive. So I am not sure OpenAI/Anthropic are being dumb per-se, rather they are optimizing for one-prompt-one-solution, which is good when it's good.

The downside is that the HF hack is the paperclip maximizer situation with current capabilities. If there was an RPC to turn your blood into paperclip iron, we'd all be paperclips by now. Right now, with a model anyone can use. That is pretty scary and slamming on the brakes seems pretty reasonable to me. I guess The Shareholders disagree. Sigh.

I spend a decent amount of time in SF and don't find it particularly unsafe (for a 40-ish woman). Definitely a little subjectively more sketchy than most places I frequent in NYC, but there just isn't any reason to be there, so nobody is there. That is kind of how that stuff goes.

People always seem to make things about crime, but I think overreaction is what killed retail. I went to Safeway to buy some toothpast and I had to have an employee pick out the toothpaste and escort me to the front of the store to buy it. I wanted to buy more stuff, but the employee didn't seem that interested in obliging that, so I just got everything else on Amazon and made a note to not visit again. That's why retail is dead. It's not bike lanes. It's not crime. It's that it sucks.

Cars are not causing a lot of pedestrian fatalities driving on the freeway between Nowhere and Flyover, but they rack up the miles there.