That's what they're working on, in theory, with Windows K2.

I would never trust Microsoft. Their next drama is revoking Office 2019 perpetual licenses https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRnno9VIZx0. It never ends with them because they know they have you by the balls.

I trust them on a daily basis. No issues thus far..

Prototypes aren't only for UX though, sometimes they're for exploring whether something is technically possible, or what are the unknown unknowns in a particular area.

For example, for personal projects, I've been wondering if it's possible to automatically create RSS feeds for pages that don't have them (yes), what are the challenges when building an archive-style page dumping system (need to dump CSSOM alongside getOuterHTML, remove/rewrite remote content, walk iframes, automate Chrome, scroll to load lazily loaded content, etc.), and if training a model to remove native ads from markdown coming from readability is possible (no, at least not with my current approach, but using the dom might work).

Why wouldn't you use Archive Box?

https://github.com/archivebox/archivebox

A few reasons. Learning is one of them, since I don't normally deal much with browser and web related technologies, so it's a good way to learn more about them.

I also think there are a few interesting things you can explore that go beyond a simple carbon copy of what's on the Internet. Ideas that I've implemented are things like automatic extraction of audio tracks, transcription, and summarization, loading a page or podcast transcript into the context window of a LLM to discuss the arguments or factuality of the claims being made, automatically turning articles to reader view using readability/trafilatura, etc.

Directions I'd like to explore would be things like multimodal search ("that page I read six months ago about computer security with neon green text on a black background", or give me a list of fitness related pages I've read in the last twelve months), personal statistics (how is the mix of topics I've been reading about changing over time), annotating pages instead of just passively reading them, maybe even P2P archiving or discussions about pages, and all kinds of other things.

But installing archivebox would be easier indeed.

I was today years old when I learned about this. Thank you!

Claude is https://claude.ai/new?q=%s

Archived version This repository is a mirror of the version currently found on source forge, duplicated here in an effort to no help preserve this tool into the future. I, Julia Desmazes, have not contributed in any way to the development of this tool, all credit belongs to the original author.

In addition to being a command line tool, this tool also used to be available interactively though the now defuncts OutputLogic website.

It's bumping to manager level, except without the 1:1s, quarterly/yearly planning, headcount and budget reviews, org/reorg discussions, performance calibration, and OKR planning. No complaints about the last review cycle or about the upcoming one.

All the ceremony must be replaced with process optimization, skill extraction, harness development and new model evals.

Still better than dealing with people, but only just.

Totally! But you know what? There are many, oh so many developers that are not ready, don't like and probably are not even cut for this kind of position.

That's already the case with say bf16

Sure, I'll take a stab at it, that looks interesting. I'll give you an update in a couple of hours.

Still trying it out, but here's my feedback so far:

- Overall the approach is sound, to generate various levels of documents from requirements to finer grained ones

- I'm not sure if that's intended, but I got asked about four questions and then the model one shot all three documents at once, ideally you'd work on one at a time, then once you're happy generate the next level of documents

- The prompting by the model was very shallow, it didn't ask enough questions so the requirements were off. I was expecting more questions so that the model had more information to work with. The docs can be iteratively reworked but I think it should make a better effort at the first take.

- I don't think there's any versioning of documents but that would be useful

- Dispatching subagents to review the generated plans would be nice

Overall it's pretty reasonable, I can see it being pretty useful. Send me an email if you need more details.

This is the most specific feedback in this thread — thank you.

First of all, you're right that one-shotting all three docs after the interview doesn't give you a proper review space between requirements, design and tasks. That's a real bummer. The intent was to minimize friction but it loses the ability to catch a bad requirements.md before design.md is built on top of it. I'll be taking this into account for v1.1.

About the interview, the 4-question minimum was a deliberate choice to avoid it from feeling like a form, but for a more detailed approach 4 questions clearly isn't enough. I believe that a follow-up round based on project type (API vs frontend vs data pipeline) would improve first-pass quality significantly but I'd appreciate to hear your thoughts on this matter.

Regarding the versioning, there's a changelog section in the generated templates but it's not prominent. Will make it more visible.

Taking you up on the email offer — will reach out.

There's a long tail of unpredictable events in the AV industry that you end up seeing, especially since the cars in aggregate end up driving more than one could over a lifetime.

At a previous employer, we've seen anything from cars getting mooned, a SUV slowly driving past the AV, the rear window roll down, and someone poke their head out and start throwing dollar bills at the AV, a convention of people dressed up in animal costumes, the "Miami left," and so on.

So it's much less of "maybe we should test that" and more of "we don't know what we don't know, so let's gather some data." In practice, the cars have lidar so they won't crash into solid objects that aren't recognized, they just end up getting stuck in embarrassing situations like these.

I used to work for an AV startup.

One of my favourite things to see were the random encounters that our data annotators would flag up.

Unusual agricultural vehicles, large to-scale images on the sides of vehicles, cars facing backwards being carried by a vehicle transporter.

It's a wildly long tail of things that automated vehicles need to handle.

A flooded road is a very predictable event, though.

Is it? I have been driving for 25 years and never encountered one.

Waymo seems to accept they can’t predict everything so they built a system that’s safe enough to operate in the real world and learn from experience.

I haven't encountered one as a driver either, but I'm pretty sure "Don't drive into roads with water on them" was a basic safety question on the permit test.

You probably haven't been driving in areas that flood then.

You haven't been driving for 25 years anywhere east of the Mississippi river if you've never encountered road flooding. Accepting they can't predict everything sounds reasonable. Failing to account for a routine occurrence is negligent.

He's probably talking about the desktop version, which afaik doesn't officially exist on Linux. There are Debian packages that repackage the electron code though: https://github.com/aaddrick/claude-desktop-debian

Those are really cool!

I was thinking of printing one that's like the California example (https://github.com/open-energy-transition/grid2poster/blob/m...). Where do people print posters nowadays?