> META II is a domain-specific programming language for writing compilers. It was created in 1963–1964 by Dewey Val Schorre at University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). META II uses what Schorre called syntax equations.
The interesting part of META II is that it can be defined in itself on one page (refer page 8 of the paper).
You need to curate your algorithm. Took me 10 years before I started blocking aggressively and now my feed is amazing with 90% bangers. Twitter is by far the best product in this space. Every other platform is 2+ weeks behind. Twitter is where the news breaks.
I had a well curated feed too (even used word filters) and yet I felt compelled to pack up and walk away. It was simply not enough.
The negative effect the various drivel had on me was nonlinear. Even if 99% of posts were fine, if that 1% was seriously upsetting, it just ruined the whole thing.
thx that looks much better, but I'll forget that syntax in the next 3 months. nowadays I am just casual commenter on HN spending points on contrarian views that I know will be downvoted and I know no one else will say it.
Recently rewatched Demolition Man (1993) where criminals are frozen in cryostasis and then reanimated – a very prescient film. All I could think of was Demolition Pig
If I may "yes, and" this: spec → plan → critique → improve plan → implement plan → code review
It may sound absurd to review an implementation with the same model you used to write it, but it works extremely well. You can optionally crank the "effort" knob (if your model has one) to "max" for the code review.
> You should start a new session for the code review to make sure the context window is not polluted with the work on implementation itself.
I'm just a sample size of one, but FWIW I didn't find that this noticably improved my results.
Not having to completely recreate all the LLM context neccessary to understand the literal context and the spectrum of possible solutions (which the LLM still "knows" before you clear the session) saves lots of time and tokens.
Interesting, I definitely see better results on a clean session. On a “dirty” session it’s more likely to go with “this is what we implemented, it’s good, we could improve it this way”, whereas on a clean session it’s a lot more likely to find actual issues or things that were overlooked in the implementation session.
I was paying both $200+/mo and I went down to only paying Anthropic $200/mo.
My experience has, for a few months, been that OpenAI's models are consistently quite noticeably better for me, and so my Codex CLI usage had been probably 5x as much as my Claude Code usage. So it's a major bummer to have cancelled, but I don't have it in me to keep giving them money.
I'd love to get off Anthropic too, despite the admirable stance they took, the whole deal made me extra uncomfortable that they were ever a defense contractor (war contractor?) to begin with.
I left the openai platform long before this, because I expected things like this. A few called me alarmist but are now also jumping ship because of this. OpenAI has zero moral or ethical substance and people _do_ care about that. I'm extreme enough that joining openAI after a specific date works against you and your CV, not with/for you, while leaving at a specific date speaks volumes in favour of you. People are the sum of their actions, not their words and siding with / continuing to use openAI speaks volumes on who you are.
This thread reminds me how Javas heavy GUI written in Java itself was called "lightweight" when in fact it did not feel lightweight at all on the hardware of the time.
> META II is a domain-specific programming language for writing compilers. It was created in 1963–1964 by Dewey Val Schorre at University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). META II uses what Schorre called syntax equations.
The interesting part of META II is that it can be defined in itself on one page (refer page 8 of the paper).
[^1] Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/META_II
[^2] Paper: https://dl.acm.org/doi/epdf/10.1145/800257.808896
reply