<h1>Bypassing Hallucinations in LLMs</h1>
<img src="/images/bike_sidewalk.webp" alt="My bike broke down. Luckily, I had my camera">
Before I get too deep, I just want to get it out of the way: OpenAI's o3 model is impressive.
With its tool use and web search capabilities, it can do a lot more than most offerings out there.
That said, although I've found it to be quite a capable coder, I still don't trust it with anything important.
Once or twice, I've instructed it to outline a React component, only to rewrite most of it myself.
I also don't trust its factual accuracy at all.
After hallucinating a campground and several entire web APIs, I can't quite believe anything it says. Not that I've trusted any model that came before.
That said, there is one thing it is incredibly useful for: finding canonical documentation for complex subjects.
I've found the greatest success, personally and professionally, when I am working with the most concrete and original source of information available.
When working with the web, the most canonical source is the W3C spec.
When working with compilers, it's The Dragon Book.
When researching the ins and outs of GNU/Linux systems, it's the <code>man</code> page.
This can't be a novel concept.
You (the reader) must see things the same way I do.
Even LinkedIn seems to agree that base-truth documentation is where we should be getting our information.
I've always wondered: if the W3C spec is the best place to find information about the web, why isn't it the first result on Google?
Why, after all these years, is W3Schools still the first result 90% of the time?
I use o3 to find canonical sources of information.
I was recently looking to improve the dynamic range in my camera, but do so before my post-processing step. By improving dynamic range in-camera, I can avoid the pitfalls of certain kinds of compression. I asked o3: "find me the canonical guide for improving dynamic range on my D7100 from the most authoritative source."
I learnt more from the resulting guide (which was hosted on the Nikon website, NOT ChatGPT) than the last three years of shooting, combined.

If there is one thing o3 is useful for, it's __finding canonical documentation for complex subjects.__

If there is one thing o3 is useful for, it's finding canonical documentation for complex subjects.

Bypassing Hallucinations in Llms

<h1>Why You Need <code>sccache</code></h1>
As the maintainer of a <a href="https://writewithharper.com">reasonably popular open source project</a> written in Rust, I find myself cloning PRs and swapping between branches dozens of times a day.
In doing so, I often blow away Rust's compilation cache either via <code>git clean -xf .</code> or by changing dependency versions.
Having a build cache that is separate from the project is a huge win for compile times, which is why I use <a href="https://github.com/mozilla/sccache"><code>sccache</code></a>.
For those unaware, <code>sccache</code> is a build tool for C, C++ and Rust projects that stands in front of the compiler.
If a given file's hash is the same across calls to the compiler, <code>sccache</code> reuses the previous result.
This cache is compiler–and project agnostic.
In my case, it sits in <code>$HOME/.scccache</code>, but you can set it up with AWS S3, Redis or a myriad of other options.
If a dependency is cached from a compile in one project, it is available for a build in another.
In short: you need <code>sccache</code> if you are frequently swapping between branches with similar (but not identical) dependencies or expect to frequently delete Rust's disk cache.
<h2>Why You Don't Need <code>sccache</code></h2>
If you are working in a single branch on a project whose dependencies remain somewhat stable, <code>sccache</code> might actually increase your compile time.
Since <code>sccache</code> has to hit the disk (or even the network) regardless of whether it is a cache hit, a little bit of latency is added.
If you expect most compiles to be cache hits or most compiles to be cache misses, <code>sccache</code> is no more useful than the built-in caching <code>cargo</code> provides.
In that case you should not use <code>sccache</code>.
<h2>Wrap-Up</h2>
Regardless of whether you install <code>sccache</code> on your machine, it is a neat little technology.
I would recommend the curious reader take a look for themselves.
You might be inspired.

Why You Need Sccache

<h1>Writing a Phrase Correction for Harper</h1>
This is part two in a three-part series.
<a href="./writing_a_grammatical_rule_for_harper">Go to part one.</a>
There are several ways to add a grammatical rule to Harper.
This post aims to outline the easiest (and most constrained): a "phrase correction".
Sometimes you'll see a simple but common grammatical error that doesn't have much to do with any broader context.
For example, I often mistype "in the" as "int he".
It happens quite often, and there isn't a broad pattern at play here.
This is a perfect candidate for a "phrase correction".
From a technical point of view, a "phrase correction" is just a mapping from one or more phrases to another set of phrases.
But they're more than a simple search-and-replace.
Under-the-hood, Harper will account for various capitalization and stylistic changes that can be difficult to cover manually.
Fortunately, they're pretty easy to add to Harper.
Before we begin, make sure you properly <a href="https://writewithharper.com/docs/contributors/environment">set up your environment</a>.
Open up the Harper <a href="https://github.com/automattic/harper">monorepo</a>.
In <code>harper-core/src/linting/phrase_corrections/mod.rs</code>, you'll find a list of entries that look somewhat like this:
<pre><code class="hljs language-rust">"GildedAge" => (
 ["guilded age"],
 ["Gilded Age"],
 "The period of economic prosperity is called the `Gilded Age`.",
 "If referring to the period of economic prosperity, the correct term is `Gilded Age`."
),
"GoingTo" => (
 // The value to map _from_.
 ["gong to"], 
 // The suggestions to present to the user, which replace the problematic text.
 ["going to"], 
 // The message for the user.
 "Did you mean `going to`?",
 // The rule description to be shown in settings pages.
 "Corrects `gong to` to the intended phrase `going to`."
),
"GotRidOff" => (
 ["got rid off", "got ride of", "got ride off"],
 ["got rid of"],
 "Did you mean `got rid of`?",
 "Ensures `got rid of` is used instead of `got rid off`."
),
</code></pre>
Each of these is a "phrase correction".
To add one for the problem I outlined above, we just need to append to the end of the list and open <a href="./never_wait">a pull request</a>.
<pre><code class="hljs language-rust">"InThe" => (
 ["int he"],
 ["in the"],
 "Did you mean `in the`?",
 "Detects and corrects a spacing error where `in the` is mistakenly written as `int he`. Proper spacing is essential for readability and grammatical correctness in common phrases."
),
</code></pre>
If you want to go the extra mile, we'd really appreciate if you added one or two test cases to <code>harper-core/src/linting/phrase_corrections/tests.rs</code> to make sure everything works as expected:
<pre><code class="hljs language-rust">#[test]
fn corrects_int_he() {
 assert_suggestion_result(
 "That pizza stayed int he box.",
 lint_group(),
 "That pizza stayed in the box.",
 );
}
</code></pre>

This post explains how to add simple phrase corrections to the grammar checker Harper—a beginner-friendly way to address common, context-independent errors and contribute to its grammar checking capabilities.

This post explains how to add simple phrase corrections to the grammar checker Harper—a beginner-friendly way to address common, context-independent errors and contribute to its grammar checking capabilities.

Writing a Phrase Correction for Harper

the_art_of_the_talk

<h1>The Art of the Talk</h1>
I've given dozens of talks over the years, yet I still feel like I have much to learn about public speaking.
The act of presenting an idea to a large audience in person is intimidating for me, as I imagine it is for most people.
Preparing for my upcoming talk at WordCamp US has me stopping to reflect on what I already know.
To recall the basic principles that turn a good talk into great one.
Conveying an idea effectively is a powerful skill. It can help get people on your side and direct them to your point of view.
Humans are beings that thrive when they build and maintain strong relationships with each other.
Good communication supercharges that process.
Here are my bold ideas for how to present ideas well, in no particular order.
<h2>Convey Exactly One Idea At a Time</h2>
A common problem people run into when they draft a presentation is not a lack of ideas: It is that they have too many.
People adore talking about themselves or their ideas.
A natural consequence is that people have a predilection to stuff a presentation with more information than they need to make their point.
Make sure to allocate time to take stuff out.
The more streamlined and clear you make your point, the more receptive your audience will be.
<h2>Use a Story</h2>
The human brain is wired for stories.
We've been telling them for thousands of years.
People remember them far better than they do arbitrary information.
In fact, that is exactly how communities used to do recordkeeping: by telling stories.
By weaving a tale into your presentation, you can prime the audience to receive your idea, and make that idea more memorable.
<h2>Explain the "Why"</h2>
The "Why" should be the first thing your audience hears from you.
Why they should listen.
Why your idea is important.
Why your input can help them in their professional or personal lives.
Chris Anderson, the Head of TED, says, "Style without substance is awful".
In other words, you can have the fanciest, most visually appealing slide deck and all the confidence in the world, and you can still have a mediocre presentation.
Find a topic or idea that you genuinely care about, and explain why the audience should care about it too.

I've given dozens of talks over the years, yet I still feel like I have much to learn about public speaking. Preparing for my upcoming talk at WordCamp US has me stopping to reflect on what I already know.

I've given dozens of talks over the years, yet I still feel like I have much to learn about public speaking. Preparing for my upcoming talk at WordCamp US has me stopping to reflect on what I already know.

Elijah Potter

The Art of the Talk

Convey Exactly One Idea At a Time

Use a Story

Explain the "Why"

Other Stuff

Bypassing Hallucinations in Llms

Why You Need Sccache

Writing a Phrase Correction for Harper