Take a pic of the pages, extract text.

"You check out guitar George, he knows all the chords"

I suppose knowing what commands to type has precedence over just typing fast.

This is not specific to programming.

https://youtu.be/Hy8kmNEo1i8?si=ttPK3z2mp0-5KyW7

The other day I came across to a video showing workers in a e-vape factory. They pick up a bunch of e-vapes from the conveyor belt (each has 6 e-vape think), stick in their mouth and vigorously vape all of them for about 5 seconds, then test the next bunch. Humans reviewing hundreds of lines of change in a PR written by AI is not very different.

You can do statistical testing of the e-vape line because you have a specific criteria and well defined tolerances that you can define on a per-sample basis and that the factory meets with some acceptable 9s of reliability.

PRs are not like this because a single bad PR can be catastrophic for your business in a way that a single bad e-vape cannot.

I would also argue that the current output from the AIs when sampled by software engineers regularly doesn't meet the bar of quality we want in our product, hence the need to review every PR and fix a substantial fraction.

If you can start to bound the impact of changes and the outputs begin to be generally acceptable unsupervised, such that all you're doing is double checking that nothing has regressed in the factory, then the sampling approach can work.

Very true. If a PR has 1000 lines I would check only a handful full of them and leave the rest for test suit .

you don't need AI to find out that the hard-capped concurrent request limit of 10 was the root cause. but you do need an AI to find it for you so you can joke about giving it a raise.

We need onlyhumans dot com first.

SPOF still applies here. You don't need evidence of fatigue or anything. You have only 1 of anything, you run the risk of ending up having nothing.

I asked an AI. I thought they would know.

What the hell is a "safety score for violence"?

A “safety score for violence” is usually a risk rating used by platforms, AI systems, or moderation tools to estimate how likely a piece of content is to involve or promote violence. It’s not a universal standard—different companies use their own versions—but the idea is similar everywhere.

What it measures

A safety score typically evaluates whether text, images, or videos contain things like:

Threats of violence (“I’m going to hurt someone.”) Instructions for harming people Glorifying violent acts Descriptions of physical harm or abuse Planning or encouraging attacks

I still can't tell which direction this score goes... Does a decreasing score mean it is "less safe" (i.e. "more violent") or does it mean it is "less violent" (i.e. "more safe")?

oh, you know Cyrus?

Everything that has a beginning has an end. It would be really cool to live until whenever and realize that given our poor capacity to recollect past events we humans are actually the goldfish of the universe. No death means you only remember hash of events that are so distant in your past which is basically how you felt. After some time of life you start to only remember your feelings without recollecting much details about the events.