Comment on Lutris now being built with Claude AI, developer decides to hide it after backlash

• Scrollone@feddit.it ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Yeah I mean. It’s not like AI can think. It’s just a glorified text predictor, the same you have on your phone keyboard

  source

  • yucandu@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    It’s like having an idiot employee that works for free. Depending on how you manage them, that employee can either do work to benefit you or just get in your way.

    source

    • daikiki@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Only it’s not free. If you run it in the cloud, it’s heavily subsidized and proactively destroying the planet, and if you run it at home, you’re still using a lot of increasingly unaffordable, power and if you want something smarter than the average American politician, the upfront investment is still very significant.

      source

      • yucandu@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Yeah I’m not buying the “proactively destroying the planet” angle. I’d imagine there’s a lot of misinformation around AI, given that the products surrounding it are mostly Western, like vaccines…

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • BackgrndNoize@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Not even free, just cheaper than an actual employee for now, but greed is inevitable and AI is computationally expensive, it’s only a matter of time before these AI companies start cranking up the prices.

      source
• Vlyn@lemmy.zip ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  You might genuinely be using it wrong.

  At work we have a big push to use Claude, but as a tool and not a developer replacement. And it’s working pretty damn well when properly setup.

  Mostly using Claude Sonnet 4.6 with Claude Code. It’s important to run /init and check the output, that will produce a CLAUDE.md file that describes your project (which always gets added to your context).

  Important: Review everything the AI writes, this is not a hands-off process. For bigger changes use the planning mode and split tasks up, the smaller the task the better the output.

  Claude Code automatically uses subagents to fetch information, e.g. API documentation. Nowadays it’s extremely rare that it hallucinates something that doesn’t exist. It might use outdated info and need a nudge, like after the recent upgrade to .NET 10 (But just adding that info to the project context file is enough).

  source

  • p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Agreed, I don’t understand people not even giving it a chance. They try it for five minutes, it doesn’t do exactly what they want, they give up on it, and shout how shit it is.

    Meanwhile, I put the work in, see it do amazing shit after figuring out the basics of how the tech works, write rules and skills for it, have it figure out complex problems, etc.

    It’s like handing your 90-year-old grandpa the Internet, and they don’t know what the fuck to do with it. It’s so infuriating.

    source

    • Vlyn@lemmy.zip ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      It’s not really that simple. Yes, it’s a great tool when it works, but in the end it boils down to being a text prediction machine.

      So a nice helper to throw shit at, but I trust the output as much as a random Stackoverflow reply with no votes :)

      source

      • p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        but in the end it boils down to being a text prediction machine.

        And we’re barely smarter than a bunch of monkeys throw piles of shit at each other. Being reductive about its origins doesn’t really explain anything.

        I trust the output as much as a random Stackoverflow reply with no votes :)

        Yeah, but that’s why there’s unit tests. Let it run its own tests and solve its own bugs. How many mistakes have you or I made because we hate making unit tests? At least the LLM has no problems writing the tests, after you know it works.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        I feel like there needs to be a post (and I don’t want to write it, but maybe I eventually will) that outlines what a model really is. It is not just a statistical text prediction machine unless you are being so loose with the definition of “statistical” that it doesn’t even mean anything anymore.

        A decent example of a statistical text prediction machine is the middle word suggested by your phone when you’re using the keyboard. An LLM is not that.

        In the most general terms, this kind of language model tokenizes a corpus of text based on a vocabulary (which is probably more than just the words in the dictionary), uses an embedding model to translate these tokens into a vector of semantic “meaning” which minimized loss in a bidirectional encoding (probably), that is then trained against a rubric for one or more topic area questions, retrained for instruction and explainability, retrained with reinforcement learning and human feedback to provide guardrails, and retrained again to make use of supplemental materials not part of the original training corpus (resource augmented generation), then distilled, then probably scaled and fine tuned against topic areas of choice (like coding or Korean or whatever) and maybe THEN made available to people to use. There are generally more parts to curriculum learning even than that but it’s a representative-ish start.

        My point being that, yes, it would be nuts to pose ANY question to a predictor that says “with 84% probability, the word that is most likely follows ‘I really like’ is ‘gooning’ on reddit”, but even Grok is wildly more sophisticated than that and Grok is terrible.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • moseschrute@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Most people on Lemmy probably haven’t given it a single minute let alone 5 minutes.

      source
    • Zos_Kia@jlai.lu ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Just yesterday I had one of those moments of grace that are becoming commonplace.

      Basically I have to migrate a service from a n8n workflow to an actual nodejs server for performance reasons. I spent 15 minutes carefully scoping the migration, telling it exactly what tools to use and code style to adopt. Gave it the original brief and access to the n8n workflows.

      The whole thing was done in 4 minutes and 30 seconds. It even noticed a bug which has been in production unnoticed for the past year. Gave me some good documentation on how to setup the Google service account, the kind of memory usage to expect so I can dimension the instant accordingly. Another five minutes and I had a whole test suite with decent coverage. I had negotiated with the client that it would take around a week, well that was the under promise of the year…

      People who go around telling it doesn’t work are incompetent, out of their minds or straight up lying.

      source
• CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  The symptoms you describe are caused by bad prompting. If an AI is providing over-complicated solutions, 9 times out of 10 it’s because you didn’t constrain your problem enough. If it’s referencing tools that don’t exist, then you either haven’t specified which tools are acceptable or you haven’t provided the context required for it to find the tools. You may also be wanting too much out of AI. You can’t expect it to do everything for you. You still have to do almost all the thinking and engineering if you want a quality project - the AI is just there to write the code. Sure, you can use an AI to help you learn how to be a better engineer, but AIs typically don’t make good high-level decisions. Treat AI like an intern, not like a principal engineer.

  source

  • oneofmany@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    “It can’t be that stupid, you must be prompting it wrong.”

    source

    • CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      It’s not about stupid or smart. It’s a tool, not a person. If you don’t get the same results that other people get with the same tool, then what could possibly be the problem other than how the person is using the tool?

      source
  • Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    “it’s your fault that it just made up tools that don’t exist” is a bold statement, bro.

    source

    • CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      No, it’s not. It doesn’t have intention. It’s literally just a tool. If you don’t get the results you expect with a tool when other people do get those results, then the problem isn’t the tool.

      source

      • Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        If the tool can’t be consistent in it’s output, it’s not a reliable or worthwhile tool to use.

        There is such a thing as a bad tool.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • Zos_Kia@jlai.lu ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      The junior analogy comes to mind. If you hire a fresh face and they ship code that doesn’t work, it’s definitely on you, bro.

      source
• Fatal@piefed.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  At a minimum, the agent should be compiling the code and running tests before handing things back to you. “It references non-existent APIs” isn’t a modern problem.

  source

  • Zos_Kia@jlai.lu ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    I don’t know what they are using cause all agents routinely do that. I suspect they are fibbing or tested things out in 2024 and never updated their opinion.

    source
• yucandu@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  I create custom embedded devices with displays and I’ve found it very useful for laying things out. Like asking it to take secondly wind speed and direction updates and build a Wind Rose out of it, with colored sections in each petal denoting the speed… it makes mistakes but then you just go back and reiterate on those mistakes. I’m able to do so much more, so much faster.

  source
• aloofPenguin@piefed.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  I had the same experience. Asked a local LLM about using sole Qt Wayland stuff for keyboard input, a the only documentation was the official one (which wasn’t a lot for a noob), no.examples of it being used online, and with all my attempts at making it work failing. it hallucinated some functions that didn’t exist, even when I let it do web search (NOT via my browser). This was a few years ago.

  source

  • p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    This was a few years ago.

    That’s 50 years in LLM terms. You might as well have been banging two rocks together.

    source

    • Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Yeah, now we’re in the iron age!

      …Where we get to bang two ingots together

      source