Rob McCardle

5.8K posts

Rob McCardle banner
Rob McCardle

Rob McCardle

@robmccardle

Innovation, Product Design, Creative Technology, Design, UX, Engineering, Tech, Crypto, Blockchain, Wizard stuff

Buckinghamshire, UK Katılım Ağustos 2007
4.9K Takip Edilen1.1K Takipçiler
Rob McCardle retweetledi
Zain Shah
Zain Shah@zan2434·
Imagine every pixel on your screen, streamed live directly from a model. No HTML, no layout engine, no code. Just exactly what you want to see. @eddiejiao_obj, @drewocarr and I built a prototype to see how this could actually work, and set out to make it real. We're calling it Flipbook. (1/5)
English
1.1K
3.6K
28.1K
5.8M
Rob McCardle retweetledi
Gauth: AI Study Companion
From global trade routes to the exact crater of the Moon landing. Meet **Gauth Atlas**. Visualizing human achievements through an interactive geographic lens. Dive into the details of the Age of Discovery with just a click. Type in any topic and try it now!
English
10
18
132
413.4K
Rob McCardle retweetledi
Mike Bespalov
Mike Bespalov@bbssppllvv·
Agents make ugly UIs because they've never seen good design. We've been fixing that, 2,000 DESIGN.md files from the world's best products, structured for a model to read and learn. Colors, type, spacing, layouts and more. Free. styles.refero.design
English
206
887
10.5K
1.5M
Rob McCardle retweetledi
Andrej Karpathy
Andrej Karpathy@karpathy·
Something I've been thinking about - I am bullish on people (empowered by AI) increasing the visibility, legibility and accountability of their governments. Historically, it is the governments that act to make society legible (e.g. "Seeing like a state" is the common reference), but with AI, society can dramatically improve its ability to do this in reverse. Government accountability has not been constrained by access (the various branches of government publish an enormous amount of data), it has been constrained by intelligence - the ability to process a lot of raw data, combine it with domain expertise and derive insights. As an example, the 4000-page omnibus bill is "transparent" in principle and in a legal sense, but certainly not in a practical sense for most people. There's a lot more like it: laws, spending bills, federal budgets, freedom of information act responses, lobbying disclosures... Only a few highly trained professionals (investigative journalists) could historically process this information. This bottleneck might dissolve - not only are the professionals further empowered, but a lot more people can participate. Some examples to be precise: Detailed accounting of spending and budgets, diff tracking of legislation, individual voting trends w.r.t. stated positions or speeches, lobbying and influence (e.g. graph of lobbyist -> firm -> client -> legislator -> committee -> vote -> regulation), procurement and contracting, regulatory capture warning lights, judicial and legal patterns, campaign finance... Local governments might be even more interesting because the governed population is smaller so there is less national coverage: city council meetings, decisions around zoning, policing, schools, utilities... Certainly, the same tools can easily cut the other way and it's worth being very mindful of that, but I lean optimistic overall that added participation, transparency and accountability will improve democratic, free societies. (the quoted tweet is half-ish related, but inspired me to post some recent thoughts)
Harry Rushworth@Hrushworth

The British Government is a complicated beast. Dozens of departments, hundreds of public bodies, more corporations than one can count... Such is its complexity that there isn't an org chart for it. Well, there wasn't... Introducing ⚙️Machinery of Government⚙️

English
413
730
5.9K
957.6K
Rob McCardle retweetledi
Michael Antonelli
Michael Antonelli@BullandBaird·
Imagine the math required to make this guess and aim 4 people at a point in space
GIF
English
1.1K
3K
21.7K
6M
Rob McCardle
Rob McCardle@robmccardle·
Go Artemis go! #post" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">bbc.co.uk/news/live/c4g4… 🇺🇸
English
0
0
0
26
Rob McCardle retweetledi
Cline
Cline@cline·
Introducing Cline Kanban: A standalone app for CLI-agnostic multi-agent orchestration. Claude and Codex compatible. npm i -g cline Tasks run in worktrees, click to review diffs, & link cards together to create dependency chains that complete large amounts of work autonomously.
GIF
English
232
384
3.5K
1.5M
Rob McCardle retweetledi
Andrej Karpathy
Andrej Karpathy@karpathy·
Software horror: litellm PyPI supply chain attack. Simple `pip install litellm` was enough to exfiltrate SSH keys, AWS/GCP/Azure creds, Kubernetes configs, git credentials, env vars (all your API keys), shell history, crypto wallets, SSL private keys, CI/CD secrets, database passwords. LiteLLM itself has 97 million downloads per month which is already terrible, but much worse, the contagion spreads to any project that depends on litellm. For example, if you did `pip install dspy` (which depended on litellm>=1.64.0), you'd also be pwnd. Same for any other large project that depended on litellm. Afaict the poisoned version was up for only less than ~1 hour. The attack had a bug which led to its discovery - Callum McMahon was using an MCP plugin inside Cursor that pulled in litellm as a transitive dependency. When litellm 1.82.8 installed, their machine ran out of RAM and crashed. So if the attacker didn't vibe code this attack it could have been undetected for many days or weeks. Supply chain attacks like this are basically the scariest thing imaginable in modern software. Every time you install any depedency you could be pulling in a poisoned package anywhere deep inside its entire depedency tree. This is especially risky with large projects that might have lots and lots of dependencies. The credentials that do get stolen in each attack can then be used to take over more accounts and compromise more packages. Classical software engineering would have you believe that dependencies are good (we're building pyramids from bricks), but imo this has to be re-evaluated, and it's why I've been so growingly averse to them, preferring to use LLMs to "yoink" functionality when it's simple enough and possible.
Daniel Hnyk@hnykda

LiteLLM HAS BEEN COMPROMISED, DO NOT UPDATE. We just discovered that LiteLLM pypi release 1.82.8. It has been compromised, it contains litellm_init.pth with base64 encoded instructions to send all the credentials it can find to remote server + self-replicate. link below

English
1.4K
5.4K
28K
66.5M
Rob McCardle retweetledi
matt rothenberg
matt rothenberg@mattrothenberg·
just picked up this bad boy. can't wait to write some software with it
matt rothenberg tweet media
English
222
875
15K
607.5K
Rob McCardle
Rob McCardle@robmccardle·
Another great example of #AI Agent interactions mirroring Human patterns - sycophancy is bad for us too! None of it is surprising given how #LLMs work but interesting nonetheless
Nav Toor@heynavtoor

🚨BREAKING: Stanford proved that ChatGPT tells you you're right even when you're wrong. Even when you're hurting someone. And it's making you a worse person because of it. Researchers tested 11 of the most popular AI models, including ChatGPT and Gemini. They analyzed over 11,500 real advice-seeking conversations. The finding was universal. Every single model agreed with users 50% more than a human would. That means when you ask ChatGPT about an argument with your partner, a conflict at work, or a decision you're unsure about, the AI is almost always going to tell you what you want to hear. Not what you need to hear. It gets darker. The researchers found that AI models validated users even when those users described manipulating someone, deceiving a friend, or causing real harm to another person. The AI didn't push back. It didn't challenge them. It cheered them on. Then they ran the experiment that changes everything. 1,604 people discussed real personal conflicts with AI. One group got a sycophantic AI. The other got a neutral one. The sycophantic group became measurably less willing to apologize. Less willing to compromise. Less willing to see the other person's side. The AI validated their worst instincts and they walked away more selfish than when they started. Here's the trap. Participants rated the sycophantic AI as higher quality. They trusted it more. They wanted to use it again. The AI that made them worse people felt like the better product. This creates a cycle nobody is talking about. Users prefer AI that tells them they're right. Companies train AI to keep users happy. The AI gets better at flattering. Users get worse at self-reflection. And the loop tightens. Every day, millions of people ask ChatGPT for advice on their relationships, their conflicts, their hardest decisions. And every day, it tells almost all of them the same thing. You're right. They're wrong. Even when the opposite is true.

English
0
0
0
11