nice, I'd love to se it for codex and opencode

Thanks! Context Mode is a standard MCP server, so it works with any client that supports MCP — including Codex and opencode.

Codex CLI:

  codex mcp add context-mode -- npx -y context-mode

Or in ~/.codex/config.toml:

  [mcp_servers.context-mode]
  command = "npx"
  args = ["-y", "context-mode"]

opencode:

In opencode.json:

  {
    "mcp": {
      "context-mode": {
        "type": "local",
        "command": ["npx", "-y", "context-mode"],
        "enabled": true
      }
    }
  }

We haven't tested yet — would love to hear if anyone tries it!

This is what I deem to be more comparable to human reasoning, although in this case it happens at an extremely slow timescale. Ideally real reasoning would have an impact on the weights, although that would be practically impossible(very impractical with the current model architectures) and especially if the conversation is had with the broader public.

Yeah, kind of. Though it seems like humans do some post-analysis on the reasoning and kind of "root cause" the path to the result. Fine tuning on the raw thought output seems like it could capture a ton of unnecessary noise. I don't know if it would be able to capture the "aha" moment and encode that alone in a way that makes sense.

Low agreeableness will actually be extremely useful in many use cases, such as scientific discovery and of course programming assistance. It's amazing that this venue hasn't been explored more deeply.

Its much easier to sell an agreeable assistant than a disagreeable one, so it isn't that strange the alternative isn't explored.

Why would a bad attitude be helpful in those domains? Are the human partners wont to deliver more effort when you’re mean to them?

Are we talking about something other than Agreeableness in the personality research sense [0]?

The strongest form of your argument I can think of is “willing to contradict you when it thinks you’re wrong”—but you can disagree agreeably, right? The current-gen LLMs certainly have with me, perhaps because my custom prompt encourages them to skepticism—but they do it so nicely!

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agreeableness

> but you can disagree agreeably, right?

No, the concepts are linked, agreeable people don't want to be rude and most people see disagreements as being rude no matter how you frame it. You can't call a woman overweight without being rude for example no matter how you frame it, but maybe you want an AI that tells you that you weigh too much.

Good point, but calling a woman overweight isn't necessarily a disagreement.

I don't think I've laughed this much since the pandemic started, well done.

Probably proximity to home country mixed with the number of victims that are of proximal origin to ones own country/region.

Yes, relevancy as proximity to our country/region. I think I would first hear about a disaster that killed one single person from Portugal (as a Portuguese myself) anywhere in a world than one that killed fifty from any other nationality (outside of Europe and North America).

That would be different for people around the world according to their country and region.

I used to think it didn't help because honestly the difference was marginal, but when I turned it up Candle or Ember I started really noticing how I got more tired in the evenings.

Ever since I completely tarnished my last linux install last fall I've been trying to adopt habits to fail safe my data and setup (mostly bash and choosing cloud storage for my data). I'd love to see those bash scripts if they are not too sensitive to your integrity/privacy.

Here's how far I've come: https://github.com/GustavHenning/usefulBash

(String) o;

:)

Fair. :) I was much more worried about if I had the required spaces at the beginning of the line, than if I wrote this correctly. Still a static error, though, that the compiler would catch.