At one point vim lacked asynchronous plugins. If a plugin was running a builder or linter it locked the editor up (from what I recall).
That fell apart when people wanted vim to do some more modern IDE kind of things like all the “… on save” stuff (build on save, test, lint, etc). I think LSP support is native in neovim as well.
I believe vim merged asynchronous plugin support a while back though, so I’m not sure how different they really are anymore.
It was a real problem, but as GP already mentioned, Vim has integrated some version of it since Vim 8 (2016), probably at least somewhat motivated by NeoVim (forked 2014).
I think the truth is sort of halfway between yall.
Hallucinations in tool call results _do still exist_, but basically everyone asks for a JSON schema for the tool call and uses that to validate and re-prompt the LLM until it emits something with a valid schema.
That all goes out the window when a string field has a “hidden” schema in that only particular strings are valid, but that restriction isn’t in the JSON schema. I have had failures when I want a field to be specifically formatted Markdown or something.
We’ll probably see something that handles this better in the future like jsonnet or Cue or dhall that has some execution capabilities so you can write a custom validator beyond what JSON schema supports.
> basically everyone asks for a JSON schema for the tool call and uses that to validate and re-prompt the LLM until it emits something with a valid schema.
Basically no one is doing that since 2024, have you been living under the rock? Read about constrained decoding.
> I have had failures when I want a field to be specifically formatted Markdown or something.
And Jev has an advantage here because it can’t generate anything?
> and re-prompt the LLM until it emits something with a valid schema.
Well, that's essential what happens, but on the "backend" side still, so it's significantly more efficient. Also, model providers can play with e.g. how likely are they to accept a valid/invalid character, so for example the first token may only be [, { or ".
As for what's not in the schema, that's an orthogonal question.
I haven’t tested with Claude specifically in a while, but I see this a lot on larger features.
It tends to be small decisions way down the stack that bubble up, or an incoherent data model that can’t handle what you’re asking for cleanly.
Eg I was messing with a state tracker the other day. The state tracker assumes a container is either currently running, or fully removed from disk.
The LLM chose to remove the state file when the container is stopped and then to remove it after, which leaks container storage.
The LLM is kind of stuck though, because every option other than “rewrite the data model” has negative outcomes and it probably violates user expectations to launch a massive rewrite there.
I've found Opus 5.5 is quite good at surfacing and clarifying these issues using Grilling[0]. Often I find that I want to expand the scope of work much larger than Claude would consider based on my original request.
Militaries have a lot of experience, and an exceptionally poor track record.
I don’t remember the last war that didn’t have credible evidence of war crimes occurring. Were bombing civilian infrastructure in Iran, Iraq had Abu Ghraib among all the Collateral Damage stuff, the Highway of Death in the Gulf was probably a war crime, Vietnam had My Lai, WWII was the advent of carpet bombing civilian infrastructure. I can’t think of any for Korea, but I also know very little so that doesn’t say much.
We still haven’t charged anyone for the second strike on that fishing boat in South America, and I haven’t heard a single rationale for why that’s not a war crime other than “fog of war”.
The US doesn’t even really have a meaningful system for finding and prosecuting these, because we aren’t signatories for the ICC and have a bill saying we’ll invade if they charge one of our service members with a war crime. We aren’t basically the furthest thing from having any experience prosecuting war crimes. I can probably count on my fingers the number of cases we’ve tried. We rarely charge our own service members, and we usually kill foreign combatants rather than capture and charge them.
The US could carpet bomb their enemies like they did in WW2, instead they pursue one of the lowest civilian casualty methods of in the history of the world, and nobody even cares because somehow that’s not good enough
Bombing civilian infrastructure is a war crime because the end state is the same as bombing civilians. Killing power shuts down hospitals and emergency responders (generators run out eventually) and desalination plants. The military is largely unphased, they’re the first ones to get gas for generators.
Also, this is carpet bombing. Carpet bombing is the targeting of civilian infrastructure with effectively willful ignorance of the collateral damage.
We started a war knowing the only way to win was either boots on the ground or war-criming our adversary into submission. We don’t get to pretend our hands are tied and we have to send out the bombers. We don’t have to do this because Iraq forces us to, we have to do this because we elected a man who can barely read Post It notes and ignored half a century of military intelligence. We are at fault for every dollar of damage caused to infrastructure and every life lost.
What makes you think these targeted strikes are any better? Did the school girls say, "o, but at least our entire city wasn't carpet bombed like an obvious war crime, instead we were drone striked in such a morally ambiguous way. O well"
No.
And why did America have so many enemies???
Maybe because we keep finding excuses to invent them, and then does hundreds of "morally grey" bombings. But at least it wasn't another Vietnam, right?
He didn’t say they were _the_ corporate party, just that they’re dominated by corporations. It’s notable because it’s an accusation that they pitch at Republicans often (not that R is doing any better there, but it’s part of their platform more or less).
The dems haven’t done anything notably anti-corporate in ages. There are rumbles about doing it (anti trust, supporting unions, climate change), but it never _quite_ seems to actually materialize into anything.
Cynically, that’s why both sides lean so hard into the culture wars. The men in suits would rather we argue about how to interpret history than whether a wealth tax makes sense.
He actually did say dems were the corporate party. He contrasted the democrats not do something that the Republicans did because Dems were dominated by corporations.
The contrast implies that Republicans are in your words "anti-corporate"
The data tier is one of the lowest tiers in the stack (for bigcorps with centralized DBs), and changes bubble up the stack. Change an API and a few upstreams have to change. Change the core DB and _everything_ has to change.
That makes the schema calcify, and the DB becomes the most stable format of the data. I've worked more than one place where "upgrade the core DB between major versions" was a multi-quarter effort.
I don’t hear people suggesting to replace an RPi with a similar device (OrangePi or what not).
What I hear a _lot_ is that the thing could have been an esp32 (or Arduino rarely).
That’s a way wider price gap. I can order Costco-sized lots of esp32’s for the price of a single RPi.
RPis pricing has really, really narrowed the space where their products make sense. Low power devices can be esp32, high power can be x86 NUC things (or interconnected esp32s if you need tons of pins).
I don’t encounter a ton of things in “too big for an esp32 but I’m positive I don’t even want the option of a beefier x86 CPU”.
No hate if it works for you. I don’t even dislike RPi, they’re just in a narrower band for me these days.
I use Pi and mostly open weight models. I pay for the $20/month Ollama plan and use Deepseek and GLM through that. I’ve never hit the limits on it, but I tend to ask for targeted things rather than “implement a whole feature in one prompt”.
I do keep an OpenRouter account topped up for things that Ollama doesn’t have. 99% of my usage there is embeddings, the other 1% is wanting to test some new model Ollama doesn’t have.
I wrote an agent launcher sort of bash script. Pass in the command to start the agent, the script checks if there’s a Jinja file in a special directory matching that name, and builds it to AGENTS.md. Then it launches the agent.
I was trying to use it as a sort of janky RAG. I had a bunch of snippets (one for DB architecture, one for how load balancing works, etc), and my Jinja files were mostly a list of snippets to pull in. Voila, a bunch of agents that share little pieces of info but have a single source of truth.
I never got a ton of value tbh, it was very good at just grepping the snippets.
Search on the app store sucks too. I haven't been able to find either a way to search for only apps that charge for downloads (I don't want to watch an ad for features, or nickel and dimed on IAP), or some kind of "minimum price" slider I can use.
That feels like a bog-standard search feature on a marketplace. I can only assume the omission is intentional.
"Stop guessing. AppRaven(.app) shows you what people really search for on the App Store, what they complain about in the apps that already exist, and hands you a plan you can start coding today."
That fell apart when people wanted vim to do some more modern IDE kind of things like all the “… on save” stuff (build on save, test, lint, etc). I think LSP support is native in neovim as well.
I believe vim merged asynchronous plugin support a while back though, so I’m not sure how different they really are anymore.
reply