Posted by ykev 11 hours ago
MacBook m1/m2 also are cheap enough now vs an Mac mini which I was surprised about, not too surprised but yeah..
Why not just use a VM in the cloud and just a CLI interface?
There has always been a trade off sold to consumers of security vs convenience and a belief that giving up a little security gets a lot of convenience.
It ends up being often about a convenience of adopting the new tech, not necessarily in a way that's in the best long term interests of each party.
I think I'm gonna be a late adopter on this one until the industry figures out a less cumbersome pricing model.
With the $200 Claude subscription I was able to get around $13-15k of API equivalent usage in one month (note: this was during the "+50% usage" promotion that they have kept extending since May). When you hit your usage limit for a given time period you get cut off until the time period resets; don't bother paying for additional usage credits, you will be disappointed.
My average API equivalent use is around $30-40/hr. I would just bite the bullet on a plan for one month, then use that to calibrate your expectations around usage and cost optimization. The plans are heavily subsidized.
Never really get good answers. There is no killer app. Just bikeshedding.
Maybe I should have the agent also do a background check.
PS: This is a joke, but feel free to steal this idea.
Then the openclaw WhatsApp module…
Kidding of course.
https://github.com/Grigorij-Dudnik/TinderGPT
> TinderGPT automates the process of writing and arranging dates with girls on Tinder, enabling you to generate romantic meetings with almost zero effort. Your only role is to like the profiles that catch your eye. After that, TinderGPT comes into the play. It initiates a conversation with the girl, using details from her profile, continues by building an emotional bond and highlighting your attractive traits, and finishes by arranging a meeting and giving you a push-up on your phone with her number.
There's lots of news about the billions AI companies spend on data center construction, but it feels like it's not even a fraction of the money they're spending on endless nonstop blogs about how great their app is at doing... things. Things that will never be defined.
Why would I need an LLM to do this for me? That’s 5 minutes of work max, and doing it gets me in the flow of work again, to see what’s going on and needs to be done.
For the folks I talk to who use a LLM for this that seems to be the case. Takes a huge cognitive load off every morning and saves them an hour or two.
More or less a very expensive band aid over a bad work environment.
I kinda use it the same way in a sense. I have a little skill I run against our (horrible) task management system to summarize things and give me a punchlist to work through sorted by priority. This saves me thousands of clicks to do the same thing in the horrible web UI. A proper system in the first place would be a lot better!
At some point I’ll probably just take that to the next logical step and have the LLM write my own web interface to abstract and replace the horrible one entirely for me.
I’m actually very time-poor, so figured it could help be clawed back time doing… what exactly?
If you put yourself in a position where you need more leverage (technical or operating) I think you might find you get some value.
- scanning logs for errors and
- opening issues which are then auto-triaged and
- PRs are opened for them and auto-reviewed and
- merged (and deployed).
This workflow alone is immensely powerful, and takes alot of burden off the team.
ITSM those unsupervised workflows are essentially an attempt at purported productivity in the near term at the expense of meaningful incremental long term burden for teams.
The only ostensible benefit is in the eyes of the AI-psychotic tinkerer, who knows no better, or in those of the clout-chasing developer farming likes on their LinkedIn posts.
It's like your AI agent is just plugging the leaks in the dyke each time, instead of fixing the architecture of the dam.
They can use agents. Like, team members don't need to be replaced, they can simply use agents when they deem it useful. If they see a trivial bug,they can put their agent on it and go work on something else meanwhile.
famously a good job for a tool that takes 10-50k logs to run out of context and forget what it's doing.
I don’t have time for much leisure coding these days. I do have time to kick off a few tasks in the morning to progress my many side projects. Nothing public / oss, just code that I find useful/interesting like home automation, content pipelines, games, etc.
There are a bunch of cases where remote control from iOS onto a Mac Mini is simply nicer than using iOS Claude Code sandboxes.
It’s the same pattern as you (hopefully) apply at $dayjob. If you are not defining a /goal and letting your agent crank you are not making full use of the models’ capabilities.
So I wouldn't agree that the agent should be cranking out code all the time, in fact that seems more like a waste of resources compared to the work it creates. But I do understand home automation software can be very one-off and simple. But then again, a properly programmed home automation suite doesn't need a SOTA model to modify it, I think.
- infinitely duplicate any and all code, helpers and components
- infinitely duplicate CSS (because they duplicate components)
- continuously write code like "read the entire db into memory and run a filter function on retrieved data"
- continuously write code like "call db with multiple queries for each element in a list"
- etc. etc.
Why the hell would I ever want to run them unsupervised?
Like I want the LLM to have a bank account and he can do ANYTHING with that bank account that he wants. But he can't fuck anything up that has to so with me. He only has 2 - 5k