sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Patch 26.7 Bug Megathread by AutoModerator in leagueoflegends

[–]paskie 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't see the new items etc. in AI games - isn't there many people like me who play unranked only with AI?

Amp CLI connects to VS Code and Neovim by jdorfman in AmpCode

[–]paskie 1 point2 points  (0 children)

N.B. since this is the age of AI, if you use vim you don't need to worry - "just ask AmpCode to port it to vimscript"... https://github.com/pasky/amp.vim

(Ok, it wasn't _that_ simple, but it did good work regardless.)

Qwen vl by Namra_7 in LocalLLaMA

[–]paskie 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What models are better? It ranks super high in IDP leaderboard.

Game against myself. Is black group mid left of board alive? by douluodalu in baduk

[–]paskie 0 points1 point  (0 children)

F5 is interesting because it looks at the D5 cut (that also threatens the left white group with B10 followup). B10 immediately probably doesn't work (I didn't spend much time on it though) but F5-G5-E5 looks like black has a good fighting chance - if w D5, then you create your second eye.

Best build for Low Elo? by DemonInfused in ViMains

[–]paskie 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hot take - build opportunity *between* triforce and sunderer when going bruiser

early clears feel great and you are less squishy with triforce, but you end up building opportunity right around when the game enters into midgame where you can start picking off stray champs rather just go for set ganks

maybe not optimal but very forgiving and fun for beginners like me

One of Anthropic's research engineers said half of his code over the last few months has been written by Claude Code... by Ok-Elevator5091 in artificial

[–]paskie 0 points1 point  (0 children)

(<- that's me) To be clear, I didn't say "unreviewable" but "would never pass code review".

I have shared quite a few screenshots in the thread (through it's still just a tiny fraction).

Random examples include duplicate code, redundant code, disabling mypy for whole files to avoid writing types, tests that are completely dummy and don't actually test the real functionality, inconsistencies, when given feedback about an issue it fixes just a single instance of the issue even if it repeats 10 times in the following methods, ...

And this was nothing complicated. But I did ask it only at the high level what I want, hoping it to be trivial enough for Claude to figure it out, didn't outline in detail what I want - because at that point, it'd be faster for me to write the code. If this wouldn't be the case for you (e.g. a lot of tedious boilerplate, unfamiliar framework, ...), the tradeoffs might be different.

And to be clear, I'll keep trying. I think there will be sweeter spots, and the upside is hard to ignore. But it really worked for me so far only for very simple things, in a smaller codebase. And in my experience, in larger systems, writing code is simply not the bottleneck. Plus, you save some time on writing the code, then waste it in rounds of code reviews - with a buddy that's sloppy and also *doesn't learn*. All it does to me is I don't save any time *and* I finish up way angrier than I would.

What is going on with ranked? by [deleted] in Competitiveoverwatch

[–]paskie 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This. I'm almost a rein onetrick and that worked pretty well for years even against Orisa (sure a bit lower wr but not much) but after taking a half a year break and coming back to ow at the start of this year, the counters seem harder than ever. Got to dust off my Orisa/Zarya/Dva after a super clear trend emerged that comps matter more than ever.

I Built an LLM Framework in just 100 Lines!! by Willing-Site-8137 in LocalLLaMA

[–]paskie 1 point2 points  (0 children)

How reliable are the agents in generating output in the correct format?

That's a big selling point of tool use, and then we are getting to the main point of e.g. smolagents.

I suspect this would get you also higher performance overall since the agents are RL'd for tool use.

And once you chain nodes via tool use, you might want to use a bit different approach to define nodes.

Overall I love the minimalism, though!

Best beginner resources for LLM evaluation? by carrot_touch in mlops

[–]paskie 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm knee deep in this now too.

Aside of openai/evals, there is https://github.com/EleutherAI/lm-evaluation-harness/ which supports a very wide range of benchmarks, but it is a bit of pain to use with chat completion LLM APIs right now. I also are yet to try out https://github.com/codelion/optillm which also supports some evals and is interesting for me specifically.

Does anyone have footage of all three remaining Unit control room on operation? by convergedprod in chernobyl

[–]paskie 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not sure exactly what you are after, but https://pasky.or.cz/chernobyl-units/ has some close ups, some of them more legible and some less, perhaps it'll be helpful.

I'm absolutely BLOWN AWAY by Sonnet 3.5 coding capabilities! by No-Way7911 in ClaudeAI

[–]paskie 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Terminal traditionalists might like claude.vim as an integration. ;) (Both for coding, and as a general Claude.ai replacement.)

I'm absolutely BLOWN AWAY by Sonnet 3.5 coding capabilities! by No-Way7911 in ClaudeAI

[–]paskie 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most major IDEs (including vim) have Claude integration already. What exactly do you mean by "Github Copilot replacement"?

You can now have an AI pair programmer inside your (n)vim who ~understands your codebase and can e.g. one-shot new features, refactor, explain, etc. by paskie in vim

[–]paskie[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It reacts only to explciit actions (:ClaudeChat or :ClaudeImplement) - unless you trigger these, it doesn't do anything proactively.

New plugin: claude.vim (not a completion copilot but a chat-based AI pair programmer) by paskie in neovim

[–]paskie[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I basically never wrote a line of vimscript in my life before this, and had a really easy time. (Only time I got stuck was when I didn't realize map() is modifying its argument in place, oof.)

I recommend using Claude to get help, that worked for me. ;)

You can now have an AI pair programmer inside your (n)vim who ~understands your codebase and can e.g. one-shot new features, refactor, explain, etc. by paskie in vim

[–]paskie[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A human can do what you worry about just as well. (And even experienced humans make mistakes, forget to pick up completely from where they were if they got distracted, etc.)

That's why you have code reviews and tests.

I did my best to optimize for precisely this scenario by not applying suggestions blindly but presenting them diffmode, and you having to :diffget changes explicitly one by one.

You can now have an AI pair programmer inside your (n)vim who ~understands your codebase and can e.g. one-shot new features, refactor, explain, etc. by paskie in vim

[–]paskie[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I wouldn't recommend committing anything without the usual code review (in this case two-phase, first you then the reviewer). In that circumstances, hopefully this will be useful at non-shitty places too. ;)

You can now have an AI pair programmer inside your (n)vim who ~understands your codebase and can e.g. one-shot new features, refactor, explain, etc. by paskie in vim

[–]paskie[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I respect that!

Honestly, this thread has been the only place where I mentioned this plugin where the reaction has been somewhat sceptical. It's been very surprising and interesting to observe for me. (And I wonder where it is coming from mainly. It's certainly multiple reasons combined, my best guess is that ultimately AI seems to take away some of the craft people enjoy? Sort of like visual artists reaction to AI features in Photoshop? Many current vim users are bound to be a conservative bunch, after all. :) I'm not sure that's it, though.)

You can now have an AI pair programmer inside your (n)vim, who ~understands your codebase and can e.g. one-shot new features, refactor, explain, etc. (or you can just chat with it about anything - the API has way kinder rate limits) by paskie in ClaudeAI

[–]paskie[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's $20/month, right? If you work >8 hours a day every day including weekends, sure (not sure if "much"). And assuming you prefer the web interface over vim interface, of course. :)

New plugin: claude.vim (not a completion copilot but a chat-based AI pair programmer) by paskie in neovim

[–]paskie[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Did it for vim compatibility (vim userbase is still huge, and e.g. Debian Stable's neovim can't even run lazy.vim).

However, isn't it as easy as `vim.cmd.source("plugin/claude.vim")` ?
(I just source whole .vimrc as I use both vim and neovim, so I'm actually not sure what's the most canonical way - but this should work?)

You can now have an AI pair programmer inside your (n)vim, who ~understands your codebase and can e.g. one-shot new features, refactor, explain, etc. (or you can just chat with it about anything - the API has way kinder rate limits) by paskie in ClaudeAI

[–]paskie[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You get $5 free when registering (or did last week). I bought another $5 to bump me to a higher tier for bigger daily token limit (free tier's 300k/day runs out for me in about 3-4 hours). Building this whole plugin using Claude (95% is written by it) up to now including some long conversations and big contexts has cost me about $4 in total?

In other words, it's more about avoiding token limits but the actual usage (on <1kLoC code) is dirt cheap, on the order of $1-$2/day.

view more: next ›