🧌the original roflscaler
🇧🇲🇺🇲🇬🇧
Joined July 2008
- Tweets5.5K
- Following421
- Followers1.4K
- Likes2.7K
James Tucker retweeted
If they made private keys open source more people could audit them and make sure they're not 4??
James Tucker retweeted
AI 모델들 뚝심 측정한 벤치마크 나왔는데 결과 개웃김ㅋㅋ
GPT-4o는 근거 없는 반박에도 94.6%나 의견을 바꿔서 그냥 긍정봇 수준이고ㅋㅋ
반대로 Opus 5.5는 타당한 반박을 받아들인 비율이 고작 32.2%임.
얘는 진짜 자기가 틀려도 말을 안 듣는 건가ㅋㅋㅋ
틀린 거 지적해 줘도 "아닌데? 내가 맞는데?" 시전하는 고집이 보통이 아님ㅋㅋ
반면 GPT-6 Astra는 타당한 반박을 88.3% 받아들임.
물론 특정 문서 평가 환경에서 나온 결과지만, 아첨 안 하는 거랑 말이 통하는 건 별개인 듯함 ㅋㅋ
논문: arxiv.org/abs/2610.15634
Deferred debt in tech is super common but these days the collectors can arrive all at once in force.
If you haven’t already started, start now.
teslas been good at sucking for years
spacex been good at blowing for years
call me when they're using talons and tails
cats been doing this shit on the sly for eons
Every professional computer user I’ve met who has these kinds of problems “types well”. Ergonomic and typing advice is destroying you. Ergonomic keyboards that minimize movement maximize these problems. Take breaks, change angles, change everything, regularly.
High thinking modes continue to be bad. They might do slightly better at one-shot type things in cycle loops against specific evaluations, but for incremental work they derail themselves and are slow and cost a fortune. They’re trash if you’re producing code that matters
100%, nail on the head. Over and over again.
James Tucker retweeted
So I was trying to understand why pull requests speeding up the Elixir version were being denied by the clankers while they were being accepted to Go/Express/Rust.
It turns out that, not only each project had a different starting point and a different prompt, but also each project also has a different set of verifications that they are required to pass!
For example, Elixir is the only guided to "preserve the pinned Rails reference behaviour", the only with a explicit verification that we are using Redis and draining its queue (so we cannot remove it while others can), and the only one actively enforcing it.
So it turns out that the people telling you to not read the code cannot even use AI to set up fair benchmarks (probably because they would have to read the code in order to do that).
You don't have to believe me, you can do your own research or ask your agent to do it for you. E.g. here is what Claude Code came back with: gist.github.com/josevalim/ae…
Also extracted a separate verification project that's responsible for the benchmarking and checking of new implementations and improvements to the existing ones. The full report from the latest runs is there too. github.com/basecamp/once-cam…
builders, compilers and linkers need to become servers for interactive development, this has been needed for a long time now. repeatedly throwing away all the setup is a waste of everyones time and is prohibitive for finer grained incremental output
look rust doesn’t compile fast and links with optimizations even slower but if your compilation takes more than 20 minutes something is actively wrong, like you should write a bug ticket wrong, in your build
re. 1: editions are stable compatibility, i think this might just be outdated commentary?
re. 2: the irony / hypocrisy seems pretty thick here, lunduke is a strongly right sided writer
if you want to clutch on to something that excludes it from userspace it's lack of stable abi
“Why do you hate Rust, Lunduke?”
I get this question a lot.
The short answer is: I don’t hate Rust. It’s just a programming language with good and bad (like any other).
In fact, you’ll rarely find me criticizing the Rust language, itself. The primary issues I raise tend to focus on the way Rust is *used*.
1) Rust (both the language and the compiler) are not yet stable. Meaning they are both in a state of flux (sometimes changing in significant ways from week to week) and, as such, are not reliable, steady foundations to build critical systems upon. This may change if the Rust Foundation focuses on releasing a truly stable version of Rust… but that hasn’t happened yet.
2) There has been a strong movement to utilize Rust as a tool to enforce political and social views. In some ways Rust zealots (including some high-profile open-source developers and managers) treat Rust more like a religious cult than a programming language. This has resulted in forcing Rust “clones” of existing tools into releases where that simply does not make sense from an engineering or end-user perspective.
I have other criticisms of Rust (such as that it is a rather ugly language), but those are mostly personal preference things.
The real, critical issues are those two above… how Rust is being used.