I think i’ve only once flat out told one it was wrong about a specific assertion I quoted and it immediately was able to find its way to what I knew to be the correct claim.

I just wonder what would happen if i was in fact mistaken and I told it confidently it was wrong without elaborating

  • sloppy_diffuser@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    20 hours ago

    strongly encouraged for me means my entire bonus is tied to skilling up with LLMs.

    “cite-or-stop” with journaling, role definitions, subagents to control context windows, and shifting as much of the work as possible to deterministic scripts has yieled pretty high-quality results.

    Expensive af though. Like the self-review skill I maintain before engineers put their code up for human review will find 30-40 things on average, where only a small handful are false positives, can burn 10% of a $20/mo plan’s utilization in a single run on a moderately sized PR. The default one my company setup in our source control usually finds 1-5 things and only 0-2 are of any value.

    • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      19 hours ago

      Oh yeah it 100% explodes your token usage by establishing a contentious paradigm. But that’s what the C-suites want, and they don’t understand (or care to understand) the subtleties of how this development methodology works. So we’ll all (somewhat maliciously) follow orders until they change their minds when they see the absolutely ludicrous LLM bill 🤪