- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
Hadn’t seen this here yet, a co-worker of mine sent it my way so I’m just spreading the word. Looks interesting, to say the least! Anyone tried this out or had any other experience with it yet?
You must log in or register to comment.
Seems a neat way to lose everything
I can sort of see the appeal, but its not for me. If anything is ever going to rename files for me its going to be a script that I’ve either written or at least read top to bottom. Not a blackbox inference engine, and especially not one based on an LLM.
I definitely would lean into your camp for sure. The demo video shows it previewing suggested renames before accepting, but I see your point and I definitely had the same initial reaction lol
Why rename the files when you could just categorise and index them…?
This seems unnecessarily destructive.
I’ve been long looking for this rename feature.
I have so many files that are titled
Document-2022(1).pdf
or
contract(1).pdf
Really wish that they had descriptive titles so I can know what’s in them without having to open them
It would be better to have this as a FUSE filesystem though - you mount it on an empty directory, point the tool at your unorganised data and let it run its indexing and LLM categorisation/labelling, and your files are resurfaced under the mountpoint without any potentially damaging changes to the original data.
The other option would be just generating a bunch of symlinks, but I personally feel a FUSE implementation would be cleaner.
It’s pretty clear that actually renaming the original files based on the output of an LLM is a bad idea though.
That’s a neat application of LLMs. I echo the other comments here in that I’d want final say on file changes and the ability to only enable it for certain directories.
I totally agree - demo video I saw makes it look like it totally has both those features
Ngl that’s a interesting idea. Would definitely want it running locally, though.
Looks like it allows that using ollama
Edit: according a couple issues, the flag that allows this is being ignored…
Haha well that’s uhh…
I like the idea, but I really hate that they’ve hardcoded the provider.
deleted by creator
