Curious how that goes, especially since Israels ulterior motives are always implied, they're not taken by their word.

And Islamists, who share their motives openly with anyone willing to listen are ignored.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47112750

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Hilarious that you start with that as TAO requires

- Continuous adaptation makes it challenging to track performance changes and troubleshoot issues effectively.

- Advanced monitoring tools and sophisticated logging systems become essential to identify and address issues promptly.

- Adaptive models could inadvertently reinforce biases present in their initial training data or in ongoing feedback.

- Ethical oversight and regular audits are crucial to ensure fairness, transparency, and accountability.

Not much magic in there if it requires good old human oversight every step of the way, is there?

First, a vendor will have the best context on the inner workings and best practices of extending the current state of their software. The pressure on vendors to make this accessible and digestable to agents/ LLMs will increase, though.

Secondly, if you have coded with LLM assistance (not vibe coding), you will have experienced the limited ability of one shot stochastic approaches to build out well architected solutions that go beyond immediate functionality encapsulated in a prompt.

Thirdly, as the article mentions, opportunity cost will never make this a favorable term - unless the SaaS vendor was extorting prices before. The direct cost of mental overhead and time of an internal team member to hand-hold an agent/ write specs/ debug/ firefight some LLM assisted/ vibe coded solution will not outweigh the upside potential of expanding your core business unless you're a stagnant enterprise product on life support.

This statement is plainly wrong.

If you boost and praise AI usage, you have to face the real cost.

Can't have your cake and eat it, too.

Use an API Key and there's no problem.

They literally put that in plain words in the ToS.

For a senior tech writer?

Come on, man.

> Any of us who use these tools could make a mistake of this kind.

No, no not any of us.

And, as Benji will know himself, certainly not if accuracy is paramount.

Journalistic integrity - especially when quoting someone - is too valuable to be rooted in AI tools.

This is a big, big L for Ars and Benji.

If the marginal cost of writing code falls flat, the opportunities to plant exploits skyrocket.

Human attention is limited and things will fall through the inevitable cracks.

Will dependency upgrades become its own sandboxing ritual?

Apple is beholden to its stockholders, not its customers.

This is such poor execution on Apple's part.

The one difference between "can do" and "should be trusted to do" is the ability to systematically prove that "can do" holds up close to 100% of task instances and under adverserial conditions.

Hacking and pentesting are already scaling fully autonomously - and systematically.

For now, lower level targets aren't yet attractive as such scale requires sophisticated (state) actors, but that is going to change.

So building systems that white-hat prove your code is not only functional but competent are going to be critical not to be ripped apart by black-hat later on.

One nice example that applies this quite nicely is roborev [0] by the legendary Wes McKinney.

0: https://github.com/roborev-dev/roborev

Most recent, FF, Chrome, Safari, all fail.

EDIT: And it works now. Must have been a transient issue.

Page seems inaccessible.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46972129

Points: 5

# Comments: 1