It’s impressive until it isn’t because it decided to “fix” an issue by simply ignoring an exception.

Should have set the effort level to “high”

I’d like to think I taught my child to lie better

Absolutely. It’s amazing how many articles showcasing vibe coding is just people reinventing things like a password generator.

If it gets it wrong the first time I rarely reprompt. I know I can get it to fix it, but it’s usually faster for me to do it because I already figured out where and what to do the fix. Low key think it’s just a ploy to get us to burn more tokens. Sure correcting it means it writes a few lines to the memory file, but it’s only a matter of time before it trips over that context as well.

I have similar problems whenever I send it to investigate a bug and the local runtime is inside a container. It cannot reliably translate paths without the help of an IDE. Hell, it even occasionally mangles API paths if I have it prefixed elsewhere in the codebase (despite having Claude.md etc, your context needs to be pure for it to be reliable). Having it fix a Dockerfile is comically bad.

Any luck with integrating platform.io? Have a esp32 project but VSCode can’t provide type hinting with it’s main c++ extension that is used by platform.io.

Everything listed should be done before ever getting into code along with business and product partners.

Ehh, it really depends on where the risk is and the problem is LLMs can’t evaluate for that unless you feed it everything. Some projects need code experiments before you settle on an architecture, but that’s only if you’re a pioneer (which frankly is where the money is at).

In my experience there are three ways to be successful with this tool:

• write something that already exists so it doesn’t need to think
• do all the thinking for it upfront (hello waterfall development)
• work in very small iterations that doesn’t require any leaps of logic. Don’t reprompt when it gets something wrong, instead reshape the code so it can only get it right

The issue with debugging is that it doesn’t actually think. LLMs pattern match to a chain of thought based on signals, not reasoning. For it to debug you need good signals in your code that explicitly tell what it is doing and the LLMs do not write code with that level of observability by default.

Edit: one of my workflows that I had success with is as follows:

• write a gherkin feature file describing desired functionality, maybe have the LLM create multiple scenarios after I defined one to copy from
• tell the LLM to write tests using those feature files, does an okay job but needs help making tests run in parallel.
• if the feature is simple, ask the LLM to make a plan and review it
• if the feature is complex then stub out the implementation in code and add TODOs, then direct the LLM to plan. Giving explicit goals in the code itself reduces token consumption and yield better plans

It’s an analogy that illustrates that you are doing his PR work in order to serve an unrelated cause. Is that clear enough to understand or do you want to send people with butterfly nets after me?

You have two masters and one is problematic. It’s nice that your master said kind things about the other, but you still have two masters.

Edit: I don’t follow the guy, I only know that this is a good thing only IF y’all convince others PewDiePie is a good guy actually.

I think you make a better point than I did. I am responding to someone looking at a racist act and insisting it wasn’t racist but stupid.

He’s too dumb to be intentionally racist but he’s a great spoke person for your cause. 🙄

A win for who? Sounds like he will deter some people and attract others based on whether they think checks notes anti-Semitism is a deal breaker. Jesus Christ this is pathetic.

Okay, but why start the framing as a problem with China? Last I checked their carbon emissions have flatlined, if we were to shift that manufacturing home it would likely be more carbon intensive due to our own inefficiencies. We could import green infrastructure but we’re a failing petro-state so here we are…

When I see a response like this I am reminded of “Americans wanting to be right at the cost of doing what is good.” At a certain point you should ask what is the intention behind your words?

You know the Irish wouldn’t have starved so bad if the Brits didn’t insist they export all food that wasn’t potatoes. Let’s not use bad policies as an example for why we can’t have good policies.

Wake me when China invades a country because they have coal.

Pssh, mine uses a random number generator for odd numbers to return true 4% of the time to achieve higher accuracy and a bettor LLM metaphor

You didn’t define authoritarianism or specifically say how it is so in this case, leaving us to guess and you to say we guessed wrong.