| |
| ▲ | lathiat 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | “Post Hoc Rationalisation” https://www.patheos.com/blogs/tippling/2013/11/14/post-hoc-r... | | |
| ▲ | supern0va an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | Exactly. I am becoming increasingly convinced that this is actually just a part of how intelligence/cognition works. | | |
| ▲ | astrobe_ 8 minutes ago | parent [-] | | But is it really what we want, machines with the same defects as humans? I don't want a pocket calculator that make mistakes "sometimes" so I have to double-check the results, I want a pocket calculator that works (to those who want to argue that pocket calculators don't give the correct result for (1/3)*3: STFU). |
| |
| ▲ | BurningFrog 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I learned this from "The Elephant in the Brain", which I strongly recommend: https://amzn.to/4iSyLX8 |
| |
| ▲ | bmacho 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | No. People have an inner monologue, partial results and ideas and they remember that. If they've worked some minutes/hours/weeks on something and you ask them why did they do that, they will either answer honestly and truthfully, lie, or say "I missed that/didn't seem important so I just chose something at random". None of these cases are similar to how AI works. | | |
| ▲ | satvikpendem 27 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | > People have an inner monologue Perhaps up to 50% of people actually don't have an inner monologue, much like many have aphantasia where they can't actually see anything in their mind either. | | |
| ▲ | archagon 9 minutes ago | parent [-] | | That’s not how that works. I don’t usually have an inner monologue either, but I do have an abstract stream of thought. It’s not as if I am always acting on instinct. |
| |
| ▲ | supern0va an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | >No. People have an inner monologue, partial results and ideas and they remember that. Yes, but the vast, vast majority of decisions you make either don't take place via an inner monologue, or include details that were not actively/consciously "thought" and reasoned with in your inner monologue. And yet, when asked why you did something, you're not likely to respond "sorry, that decision was made subconsciously". Instead, you use your inner monologue to try to backfill in a reason why. That reason may be correct, or it may not be. You don't actually know, since you have new data that may be updating your own internal state as you try to rationalize it after the fact. | | | |
| ▲ | yawnxyz 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I think this is true with some people, but I don't think this holds true for some (or even most) people across the US (at least not all the folks I've worked with) | |
| ▲ | croo 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Actually split brain experiments tells a different story. The left hemisphere actively confabulates, inventing plausible explanations for actions it didn’t initiate, suggesting that much of human self-narrative may be post-hoc storytelling. | | |
| ▲ | bmacho 13 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | > The left hemisphere actively confabulates, inventing plausible explanations for actions it didn’t initiate, suggesting that much of human self-narrative may be post-hoc storytelling. Sounds like the left hemisphere usually uses something from the right hemisphere to answer those questions and it can't do that if it's been cut off? We know that our brains are capable of hallucinating due to substances (drugs), being asleep, brain damage (including split brain), hypnosis, etc. Just as RAM damage make your computer do weird shit. That doesn't mean it operates that way normally. You can't just remove a huge part of a system and then assume that the whole system behaves the same. | |
| ▲ | satvikpendem 27 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Indeed. People literally make stuff up when their corpus callosum is severed. | | | |
| ▲ | 25 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
| |
| ▲ | nemomarx 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I kind of want my computer systems to be more reliable and predictable than paying an intern to manage something and asking why they messed up | | |
| ▲ | jaggederest 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | At this point it very dramatically is more reliable and predictable than any human I've worked with. Do you know anyone who actually reads and adheres closely to all of the documentation every time it's changed? | | |
| ▲ | wccrawford 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | That was my experience with Claude when my vibe-coded project was small. But now that I've been working on it a month and there's a lot of documentation, it's pretty clearly ignoring parts of the documentation and parts of the code. It will come up with some ridiculous statement about how something works, and I'll challenge it, and it'll admit I'm right. It definitely reads more documentation than any programmer I've ever worked with (myself included) but because it doesn't have a memory other than the documentation, it still makes mistakes like that. I haven't turned on "memory" or tried it with Codex, so I don't know how that'll change soon, though. | | |
| ▲ | jaggederest an hour ago | parent [-] | | Yeah the biggest task these days that I do manually is curating the documentation. AGENTS.md in every major directory, and a variety of reference docs that are explicitly referenced in those files. # See DOC-ITEM-NAME
DOC-ITEM-NAME.md
When referencing documents, always use the exact syntax See <TAG> - this is enforced by a lint on precommit
And those doc items are basically all of the values, architectural, strategic, and tactical items. It's a poor man's in-repo RAG but it's shockingly effective, especially if you keep them small. I may migrate some/all of them to skills over time, but I usually update them biweekly, and I only allow agents to make small edits or propose new notes. And typically I go through and delete or curate any agent edits before merge.Depending on language I've seen this scale past multiple millions of lines of code, as long as you pair it with all of the linting and tooling that you can possibly build. |
| |
| ▲ | bluefirebrand 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I don't know anyone who has that kind of time, no |
|
| |
| ▲ | skinfaxi 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | People don't make rational decisions that make rationalized decisions. Is there any thought to pulling your hand off a hot surface? | |
| ▲ | voakbasda 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Every time I hear someone complain about hallucinations, I laugh at the total lack of self awareness about our species. Humans are just as bad (now, probably worse) at telling the truth, whether due to intention or poor memory. |
|
