aleks bykhun
41.2K posts

aleks bykhun
@caffeinum
🇺🇦 founder in SF eval your agent-readiness at https://t.co/Zsor9Lr2Kl i love emdashes —
San Francisco Katılım Temmuz 2010
1.7K Takip Edilen2.4K Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
aleks bykhun retweetledi

@justalexoki i watch words as they appear on the screen, equally surprising to me as surprising they arrive at you
English

and Sonnet 5!
have to concede, Grok 4.5 is very fast and efficient
Mika Sagindyk@heymikasagi
GPT 5.6, Grok 4.5 and Fable 5 are now live on 2027.dev✨ You can run Agent Experience evals in different model x harness setups, including this week's latest releases + see where agents face friction Excited to see how the newest additions of @openai, @grok and @claudeai stack up when using devtools 🫡
English
aleks bykhun retweetledi

@webdevMason i’d rather buy a new couch every month than become this monster and i don’t even have kids
English

@jaredrhizor @KentonVarda i’m referring to the fact that it’s a messy boundary, cause arguably we write code for other humans to read, too
English

@caffeinum @KentonVarda Yeah, I was referring to writing specifically, not all artifacts.
English

I just declared a moratorium against AI-written change descriptions (e.g. PR and commit messages, also issues/tickets) from my team.
AI was writing change descriptions that were worse than useless to me as I tried to review PRs: outlining details of the code that could easily be seen by looking at the code, but omitting the higher-level framing needed to understand broadly what the code is doing.
I think people like having AI write these things because the output looks structured and thorough, which makes it feel professional in a way. But this isn't actually valuable. Concise, high-level descriptions are better for everyone. If I need to use my own AI to interpret what your AI wrote then something is wrong. Let AI write code, sure, but for the description, I'd rather see your prompt than your output.
We could maybe have extended agents.md with guidelines on writing descriptions, but this seemed a bit pointless since a good, concise change description only takes a few minutes to write -- not a significant time savings to delegate to AI. At least, it doesn't take long if you understand the code -- and if you don't understand the code, then I'm definitely not merging it.
English

@jaredrhizor @KentonVarda agree, but arguably code is also person-to-person, otherwise we’d push binaries
English

@KentonVarda All person to person writing should probably be human-written.
English
aleks bykhun retweetledi
aleks bykhun retweetledi

@jeremiahjw once coached someone I dated on how to handle a tech team issue with "you have to make him think it was his idea" and his eyes got wide as he began to put it all together
English


@caffeinum An ultimate B-player is Claude, and you know I’m right
English

@caffeinum @trq212 crazy!! also pls 100k mrr for us and all friends
English

Thariq @trq212 from Claude Code team has just released a guide on how to prompt Fable to build new features
In a nutshell, it's all about finding out how to put your unknowns into words. He offers 11 prompts that help you collaborate with Claude to surface these!
Here's the guide implemented as a skill:
github.com/team2027/claud…

Thariq@trq212
English

@caffeinum @trq212 super cool! i wish Fable was available for longer
English











