You should be glad that the popup isn't using any dask patterns to coerce you into choosing an option you wouldn't otherwise agree with

Am I missing something or does that article only contain the back story and nothing actually noteworthy?

It contains the story of how Carl Sagan convinced the Voyager crew to turn its sensors towards earth so as to see if life could be detected using its quite minimal sensor suite --- I thought it had a link to the original published paper.

The fate of the Strategic Helium Reserve is a different issue and there are many articles and op. ed. pieces on it --- the Wikipedia article should cover this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Helium_Reserve

This is HN, not Reddit.

Only who could've imagined that security LLMs are vulnerable to prompt injection...

You can't shame the execution, you can shame the order

My oh shit moment was when I thought it was going to be the future but it ended up leaving me disappointed, frustrated and annoyed. It's closed down tech, stealing work, ruining our climate and it doesn't work remotely as well as advertised.

It's also unclear what conversing agents are useful for other than wasting money, energy and water.

It's hard enough to get the same model to be consistent around it's vision let alone multiple of them.

I'm building an EMR and the other day asked Claude what a decent model would look like for capturing wound orders. Then, I took the output, started a new session and asked the new session to critique that model and the response made me want to pull my hair out. It blasted the model from it's former self and suggested making a ton of updates.

I'm sure more scoped tasks would fair better, but it was pretty frustrating.

> Then, I took the output, started a new session and asked the new session to critique that model and the response made me want to pull my hair out.

I do this with all my important code, before I’ve even looked at it. And not just a critique, I ask “does this solve the problem X and was it built to spec Y”. Then I do my own review once the robots stop arguing.

If your expectations are that the quality of the code matches the confidence level of the robot’s tone, you’re gonna have a bad time.

I prefer Codex’s depth and guidance but prefer Claude’s execution because it’s more transparent.

I use both daily. I’m the intermediary though.

If I don't see the point of Elixir, or I don't like it, or I simply straight up hate it, why would I go into HN submissions about new Elixir versions and spew my personal opinion that has nothing to do with the topic at hand?

You can just skip commenting unless you have something actually useful to add. Even if it's criticism of the specific thing, but at the very least make it on topic instead of general digressions that just add noise to the conversation.

What a weirdly hostile comment.

You really don't choose a Framework based on raw performance. You coose it because your values align with their philosophy.

Same goes for a Fairphone

Very nicely factual and non-clickbait article for once.

Oh no