
Maintainable software, SAP, Smalltalk, science and global politics. Software Exploration Tools @Moose2Model and @SAP2Moose. @RainerWWinkler@fosstodon.org
München
Joined January 2012
- Tweets5.7K
- Following493
- Followers419
- Likes18.4K
Rainer W. Winkler retweeted
A 101st Airborne brigade commander on how he doesn't use AI for tactical plans because LLMs "don't really understand three-dimensional space."
I suspect we'll see more of these realizations as AI tools roll out to troops and hype meets reality.
Talking to a current AI chatbot is not communication - it is thinking with a mirror.
No consciousness, no one there - only probability speaking back.
Rainer W. Winkler retweeted
The GPT-5 fiasco is mostly attributable to OpenAI giving both models below the same name
Rainer W. Winkler retweeted
✨ 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗣𝗮𝗿𝗮𝗱𝗼𝘅 𝗼𝗳 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗽𝘁 𝗘𝗻𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗲𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 ✨
🤯 Overestimated: People make it seem way more complex and intimidating than it really is.
🧐 Underestimated: At the same time, most don’t realize just how radically different it is from traditional software engineering.
💡 Think of an LLM as a universal function: we give it text, and it gives us text back.
𝚏(𝚝𝚎𝚡𝚝_𝚒𝚗) → 𝚝𝚎𝚡𝚝_𝚘𝚞𝚝
The catch?
🕵️♂️🔍 No one has the user manual for this mysterious function!
Our entire job is to experiment, explore, measure, evaluate, and uncover how it works — figuring out the hidden transformation between input and output.
Rainer W. Winkler retweeted
A reason companies are excited about agents is that they think agents will let them skip the hard task of figuring how to integrate AI into the daily process of work- in theory, agents just let you treat the AI like an employee.
More value will come from tackling the hard task.
Rainer W. Winkler retweeted
Is anyone working on an AI-optimised language/VM and an AI model optimised for coding them? Seems like an obvious thing to do as we move to full AI software development automation. Python, JavaScript, and co are optimised for human readability, not for AI.
Rainer W. Winkler retweeted
Scientists have been publishing climate models since ~1970.
A good way to evaluate their skill is to compare what they expected to happen in the years after the model was published to observed climate changes.
It turns out most models were pretty spot-on:
Rainer W. Winkler retweeted
We're missing (at least one) major paradigm for LLM learning. Not sure what to call it, possibly it has a name - system prompt learning?
Pretraining is for knowledge.
Finetuning (SL/RL) is for habitual behavior.
Both of these involve a change in parameters but a lot of human learning feels more like a change in system prompt. You encounter a problem, figure something out, then "remember" something in fairly explicit terms for the next time. E.g. "It seems when I encounter this and that kind of a problem, I should try this and that kind of an approach/solution". It feels more like taking notes for yourself, i.e. something like the "Memory" feature but not to store per-user random facts, but general/global problem solving knowledge and strategies. LLMs are quite literally like the guy in Memento, except we haven't given them their scratchpad yet. Note that this paradigm is also significantly more powerful and data efficient because a knowledge-guided "review" stage is a significantly higher dimensional feedback channel than a reward scaler.
I was prompted to jot down this shower of thoughts after reading through Claude's system prompt, which currently seems to be around 17,000 words, specifying not just basic behavior style/preferences (e.g. refuse various requests related to song lyrics) but also a large amount of general problem solving strategies, e.g.:
"If Claude is asked to count words, letters, and characters, it thinks step by step before answering the person. It explicitly counts the words, letters, or characters by assigning a number to each. It only answers the person once it has performed this explicit counting step."
This is to help Claude solve 'r' in strawberry etc. Imo this is not the kind of problem solving knowledge that should be baked into weights via Reinforcement Learning, or least not immediately/exclusively. And it certainly shouldn't come from human engineers writing system prompts by hand. It should come from System Prompt learning, which resembles RL in the setup, with the exception of the learning algorithm (edits vs gradient descent). A large section of the LLM system prompt could be written via system prompt learning, it would look a bit like the LLM writing a book for itself on how to solve problems. If this works it would be a new/powerful learning paradigm. With a lot of details left to figure out (how do the edits work? can/should you learn the edit system? how do you gradually move knowledge from the explicit system text to habitual weights, as humans seem to do? etc.).
Rainer W. Winkler retweeted
You should be so lucky to have people throughout your research career that you can openly bounce ideas to and from - especially if they complement your strengths in your areas of weakness - it is a rare and precious gift.
Rainer W. Winkler retweeted
Just President Zelensky casually hangs out with Ukrainian cleaning staff at the Czech parliament
Rainer W. Winkler retweeted
Americans seem to be waking up to the fact that they have elected a ruinous madman.
trib.al/sFzFzOy
Rainer W. Winkler retweeted
I tell students on the first day of class that if you're truly learning it's supposed to feel uncomfortable. The reason is that real learning is not simply the accumulation of facts; it is deep understanding, building mental models of the world, and other higher-level abilities. The problem is that we already have simple, intuitive, and usually incorrect mental models of most things in the world around us. So real learning usually involves *unlearning*. And that has an extremely high cognitive cost and we're very resistant to doing it, presumably for evolutionary reasons.
Students go so far as to learn concepts in class but somehow parcel them so that they think the concepts are only applicable to the toy problems on tests but not the world around us! Turns out these mental gymnastics are still easier than actually updating their mental models. (The screenshots are from the book "What the best college teachers do.")
It only gets harder, not easier, to learn as we progress in our careers, because in addition to the cognitive cost of learning, you have to face the prospect of admitting that you were wrong in front of subordinates, if not in public, and admitting to yourself that you've been making suboptimal decisions all along.
I've found that the only way to continue to learn is to develop a kind of masochism where you learn to enjoy, or at least love-hate, the feeling of having been wrong. It's not easy but I think it's necessary!
Rainer W. Winkler retweeted
🔍 Observability is a safety net—not a magic wand!
🚫 If you're only catching AI system issues in production:
- Users face poor reliability.
- Trust erodes fast.
✅ Offline evaluations let you:
- Iterate effectively.
- Build confidence early.
- Deliver truly reliable and trustworthy AI.
⚖️ Don’t rely solely on observability—invest in offline tests and evals and iterate your way to 99.999% reliability!
Rainer W. Winkler retweeted
»Links ist vorbei! Es gibt keine linke Mehrheit und keine linke Politik mehr in Deutschland! Es ist vorbei!
Wer Rhetorik und Politik der AfD kopiert macht sich überflüssig. Heute ist die AfD größte Oppositionspartei, Dobrindt ist Innenminister, Weimer Kulturstaatsministers.
Rainer W. Winkler retweeted
NASA's 10 rules for developing safety-critical code
learn by heart and practice
Rainer W. Winkler retweeted
Replying to @intellectronica @GergelyOrosz
Oh, let's be honest. The two reasons employees aren't recording information are
1) They don't enjoy writing.
2) It's not going to make them look good come performance assessment time.
No amount of tech is going to change that.






























