During development I encountered a caveat: Opus 4.5 can’t test or view a terminal output, especially one with unusual functional requirements. But despite being blind, it knew enough about the ratatui terminal framework to implement whatever UI changes I asked. There were a large number of UI bugs that likely were caused by Opus’s inability to create test cases, namely failures to account for scroll offsets resulting in incorrect click locations. As someone who spent 5 years as a black box Software QA Engineer who was unable to review the underlying code, this situation was my specialty. I put my QA skills to work by messing around with miditui, told Opus any errors with occasionally a screenshot, and it was able to fix them easily. I do not believe that these bugs are inherently due to LLM agents being better or worse than humans as humans are most definitely capable of making the same mistakes. Even though I myself am adept at finding the bugs and offering solutions, I don’t believe that I would inherently avoid causing similar bugs were I to code such an interactive app without AI assistance: QA brain is different from software engineering brain.
外婆语速也很慢，一句话要重复很多遍，有时忘记按下说话键或误触其他按钮，导致一个简单的问题会重复很多轮对话。，这一点在旺商聊官方下载中也有详细论述
63-летняя Деми Мур вышла в свет с неожиданной стрижкой17:54。关于这个话题，同城约会提供了深入分析
I have been thinking a lot lately about “diachronic AI” and “vintage LLMs” — language models designed to index a particular slice of historical sources rather than to hoover up all data available. I’ll have more to say about this in a future post, but one thing that came to mind while writing this one is the point made by AI safety researcher Owain Evans about how such models could be trained:
（五）发现网络攻击威胁和网络违法犯罪线索的，应当及时采取处置措施，保存相关记录并向公安机关报告，配合开展侦查调查；