Tadpole9181

I feel like the author has been really lucky with their coworkers, or is not in a leadership position.

My entire professional life I have dealt with people who refuse to do basic research. They won't diagnose, they won't investigate, they won't RTFM. Instead, they'll ask me questions as the very first step.

Just like I would forward them information like "the docs say...", I'm going to start by forwarding information like "Claude says..." so as to not waste my own time until they give me a specific reason they're asking me. Odds are they're actually just being lazy / intellectually incurious and haven't even Googled it or asked Claude.

Now if someone sends me a well thought out question with what specifically they're having trouble with, I'm more than happy to actually dig in. But odds are, questions like that will include research and auditing, which I'm going to do with Claude. I'll double-check its work, but I still want to explain what information is coming from me and what information is coming from it. They can use that to evaluate the level of trust they have in that information, instead of me making the decision for them.

I am empathetic to the author's point, though. It's frustrating to get a taste of my own medicine on this, but I often take that as a sign that I'm doing the thing I hate and should have asked a better question. If I reflect and still believe otherwise, I message them politely about it. And if it repeatedly happens, I escalate to our manager - like I did before Claude existed.

I haven't looked into it myself, but didn't OpenAI go through another company for sandboxing? Wouldn't failure of containment place liability in their hands?

They're both misdirection jokes.

The first one sounds like the dad was replaced by computers. But then reveals the dad is a sex worker and being replaced by sex toys.

The second one sounds like the person was being intimate with dangerous kitchen equipment, then reveals that a "pickle slicer" is a job for a human and not a machine.

Wouldn't it be nice if we had some kind of government agency who can strictly oversee how things are weighed and measured to protect consumers from vague and abusive corporations? I sure miss when the US was a functioning state.

Heck, someone in the emulation community dropped a preview that they're a couple of months out from creating a Switch game recompiler - which generates native x86 windows builds AOT. It's incredible.

I have to imagine that AI has significantly increased the velocity of technically demanding hobby projects.

Only for the $100 subscription, correct?

I still do upfront planning and then do careful review of all AI content. The behavior the parent described above hasn't happened for me since around Opus 4.6.

The most telling one is counting function invocations wrong, because that's simply not how models work anymore. They use terminal commands and Python scripts for research like that (if not an LSP, if one took the time to set up their tools most effectively).

Combined with their attitude, I have little doubt that the parent has disabled tool calls, is working in some janky Harness like chat/Duo/Juno, or is using a severely reduced or outdated model.

Not knowing your ZIP or phone number is genuinely insane. That's not even a skill! How does this person operate - do they even know their last name?

Good lord, this is several weeks late at this point. The joke is so damn worn out at and I'm personally far more tired of seeing people online thinking they're clever for saying "load-bearing" for the millionth time than I am at Claude doing it. At least it has an excuse.

Well, naturally people who use it are doing so because they like it. But I'm sure OpenAI is looking at the relative value/usage of Terra next to the other tiers.

The one I've gotten extremely tired of is every single AI thread now having dozens upon dozens of the exact same joke where people talk in Claudish.

It was funny the first time. But I genuinely don't understand people 6 levels deep or 30 comments down the thread thinking, "wow - this'll really knock their socks off".

It probably didn't see that much use, as it struggled to find a niche. If you wanted intelligence tasks, Sol was cheap enough and much smarter. If you wanted performance and cost-effectiveness, Luna was significantly better value while being only a little less intelligent.

Terra ended up just being an awkward middle ground that was not particularly suited for any workload.

Unlike the other religions, "The Egg" doesn't impose morals or pretend to be an infallible historical record, prophet of things to come, or explainer of the universe. It's just a cute philosophical story that exists entirely within the imagination to make us feel better and less lost.

That is to say, it just lacks the same "baggage" of the others.

I'm not going to deny the starting premise (tech breaks things, sometimes laws), but I don't think your follow-up is fair (we are responsible for all negatives).

Why is it our fault that governments have completely abdicated their responsibilities? Why is it our fault that everyday people literally refuse to become politically or economically literate and/or vote?

Tech has given the world, for essentially free, the entire wealth of human knowledge at their fingertips. We've given them ways to learn and communicate. We've overhauled transportation and logistics and payment. Fairly soon (decades), human labor may be obsoleted and who knows what good that may bring us.

And, yes, we also gave them mass surveillance and gig economies and hyper-addictive systems. Just like engineers gave us guns and chemists gave us poison and physists gave us nuclear bombs and doctors gave us lobotomies.

They had quite literally decades to recognize the threat. We screamed the dangers from the rooftops and in congressional hearings. We told people social media is poison. Betting sites are poison. You are the product. Watch out for market capture. You need to legislate us.

Normal folk called us crazy nerds and basically told us where to shove our concerns. But now it's our fault, naturally. We didn't do enough. We didn't perceive all possible outcomes, assume the world would be negligent, and refuse to make things we thought would be helpful - as if someone else wouldn't have thought of such Einstein breakthoughs as "socialize online" or "couch jumping online" or "taxis.. online".

And just to be clear, I'm speaking collectively just because you are. I make very boring stuff that is well within the confines of the law and only serves to help people.

And you could change channels while the ads played.

Third party here, I feel like I'm missing something. Your comment seems somewhat pointed and I don't understand what exactly you're asking for?

Weren't they just saying that it's self-evident that preventing a manufacturing superpower - one with a significant pool of industrial engineers and effectively unlimited money & government backing - from acquiring some good is a temporary measure? Because if they have sufficient incentive, they would just... Learn to build it themselves?

After all, their entire nation is built around building things, and catching up / leap-frogging is much easier than starting from scratch.

Yeah, the way it's aesthetically framed like it's official immediate skeeves me out. I doubt it's intentional, given they clearly state "community" at the top, and more a case of poor judgement and AI look-aliking.

They have a plugin ecosystem, one of which is auto-named sessions. I imagine implementing your own wouldn't be too difficult either, if that one doesn't meet your standards of trust.

You could even just make a harness hook in Claude or Codex after installing the Herdr skill, telling the LLM itself to update names on start.

Heck, I think this works via the plugin system?

I don't see how this is a meaningful statement, as it implies there are games that cross this threshold. GTA V and Cyberpunk are some of the most critically aclaimed and beloved games ever made?

I would agree that 1-2 years ago models were more "slot machine"-esque - sometimes the output was good, sometimes the output was bad. And as a result, I primarily used them for auto-complete functionality and bouncing ideas around. In those workflows, you can easily ignore it if the spin is wrong.

Not everyone has the desire to work around the system, and many are diametrically opposed to the concept of AI. They get this perception that it's a slot machine because of that inconsistency, and then do the human thing of assuming that other people must just be flawed if they're different from them. They're "addicted to gambling".

Obviously, things have changed. Open models can still be like that, but are often so fast and cheap at iterating it doesn't matter. SOTA models aren't perfect, but are to the point that they're generally much better than the average developer.

But once that perception set in and the meme spreads, it's really hard for some to break out of it. Especially at the pace AI development has been moving. It's just that simple.

That is what you struggle with the most? Are you kidding me?

English has no distinct personal pronoun for an "it". "I" has to be used for grammar to be attributive. There's quite literally no alternative without using passive voice for everything, which is miserable to read and creates ambiguity on if the speaker (it) did something or something happened to have been done, which then requires entire sentences to clarify.

You aren't stupid, you know what it means when it says "I". And it serves a grammatical purpose. You're getting upset at a toaster for ringing a bell to notify the toast is done. "Toasters aren't bell ringers!?"

The Wiki page above didn't really go into it much, but how much of the cost of nuclear power is self-inflicted? I.e. regulatory costs and actually paying the cost of externalities up-front. And if we were more consistent at building such facilities and producing said fuel, would there be cost reductions from scale?

Hey, quick question, who does virtually all manufacturing for US and Canadian and EU citizens? And why is the rise of Chinas emissions so coincidentally timed to the fall of those countries'?

I didn't go into the study, but looking at all the little text blurbs about the numbers, I don't see anything about if a US citizen purchasing a product that's made in China counts as US emission, as it obviously should.

Using corporate externalities to trivialize individual contribution is utter nonsense, though. Coke does not make plastic bottles because they think it's fun. Big oil executives don't just fill big Scrooge McDuck swimming pools of the black stuff.

Individuals purchase products from companies, driving that demand. Then are absolutely unwilling to make even the tiniest, temporary sacrifices to demand those companies reduce those externalities.

Hell, half of these individuals don't even both to vote. That's straight-up the bare minimum participation trophy level of effort.

My concern is that the orange one and his tribe may never leave at this point. The voters seem totally immune to reflection and the party has accumulated so much power, festered so much rot, and replaced so many government officials it feels like no election will ever be fair again. Even if one is, the pendulum will just swing right back to them the next election.

And SCOTUS is compromised. They're letting them redistrict based on political party to dilute opposition. They're allowing Trump to politicize the post office to potentially delay mail in ballots so they won't be counted. They're allowing Republicans to mass revoke voter registrations and sell that data.

And now ICE, Trump's personal, unaccountable Gestapo in training, is getting access to voter roles. What will they possibly use that for if not to influence the voting process?

It's a good thing SCOTUS ruled that POTUS is entirely immune to all consequences and can pardon himself. I'm sure that won't empower a coup.

The problem with people constantly pointing to the Ozone layer is that it was only really addressed because it cost virtually nothing to do so. All we had to do was switch from one bad thing to another good thing, which was already becoming cheaper.

Climate change as a whole requires a fundamental shift from the basis of almost all chemical manufacturing and transport logistics. And doing so will cause cataclysmic changes to the socioeconomic standings of entire regions of the world.

No, when you run it Claude just writes a bash script used to generate the status line. Not sure what they're talking about.

This is actually a built-in Claude Code feature: `/statusline` will ask how you want it to look and set it up for you.

IIRC, the Montreal protocol only worked because it could be solved with existing technology, quickly, with almost no economic cost and happened in a totally different era of global politics.

Climate change has... well... none of that. Not only that, but by the time it gets bad enough to convince people, it may be literally impossible to stop.

It's grim to think about, but if the nuke is falling it's too late to build an iron dome. We have several nuclear bombs dangling above us. We know they're there - permafrost, AMOC, ocean life collapse - just not exactly where, and we're blinding swinging a knife on a stick while actively yelling for a longer stick and telling the research committees not to tell them if they're getting close.

I also think it's important to distinguish selling out from participating in culture and making things people may enjoy. The pendulum often swings between extremes before settling on reasonable middle ground.

Having fun colors for one of the world's most popular cookie brands is pretty low on the scale of harm compared to, say, actively promoting people to go use online gambling services or buy snakeoil supplements.