959 karma · joined December 12, 2010
One thing I've had to write as a layer on top of it is a way to assemble agent-specific CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md from fragments.
For example, I have a little fragment that has all agents respond to me in ordered list format. (Since they often ask a bunch of question all jumbled throughout a response, the ordered list format allows me to respond to those specific questions.) And I also have a growing anti-Claudeism fragment as well.
Then I combine this with project-specific fragments and have it assembled into into a single CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md. The layer also does a little reporting on the length of the resulting files and notifies me if it ever grows beyond a certain size.
I don’t mean this callously. People confuse not having a choice with not liking the consequences of their choices.
You always have a choice. At minimum you can always choose to accept your circumstances. If you choose to not accept them, then your options are to choose to change them and accept the consequences of that choice, or to not change them and in the process choose to be a victim of circumstance and live in a state of complaint or dis-ease or anger or whatever other ill you create for yourself.
Those are literally your only options. The circumstances are seemingly not going to change. That means you have to. Whatever choice you are making now is seemingly not serving you, ergo a post on HN. What new choices can you make that will lead to a different result?
It seems we are all (on HN) thoroughly convinced that the models have all gotten worse at writing as the version numbers have gone up and they are supposedly more powerful models. Sol 5.6 is nowhere near as bad as Opus 5 or even the 4 series but not great.
But looking back there was a time we were enamored with how they wrote. Perhaps it’s related to the newfound prohibitions on “write in this writer’s style”? I wonder if training the models to not be able to do that anymore has steered them towards not being able to write, at all, in any existing human good writing style and they are navigating the small pathway through all existing good human writing to whatever you want to call what they are doing now?
I have noticed myself having a visceral reaction to the AI tells now, somewhere between disgust and anger. And I am not an angry man and I like AI! There is just something about the voice that is incredibly off-putting, like a know-it-all friend who just ripped a giant fart. It is annoyingly correct and also smells really bad.
I don’t know what it is specifically, but my weak human pattern-matching skills find this kind of language increasingly revolting. I don’t know why it is revolting, per se. It’s just the feeling I get.
Of course, me saying this on HN will get incorporated into GPT-5.6.175 or Claude 4.93 and it will make some version that just moves the revolting frontier elsewhere…
If you ask the average human "Why?", they will generally get defensive, especially if you are asking them to justify their own motivation.
However, if you ask them to describe the thinking and actions that led to their result, they often respond very differently.
And the Chinese manufacturers, of course. If you haven’t been outside the US lately you don’t realize just how popular BYD is everywhere but here. I’m in Thailand at the moment and they are everywhere. Mexico too.
I am not making any assumptions of malice, unless we’re getting into “malice is just a perspective, there is no such thing as malice, it’s just your interpretation” in which case the same can be said about incompetence or stupidity and there’s no point in having this conversation in the first place.
But assuming that’s not the case, one must only look at Elon’s X tirade yesterday against Somali Americans, calling the actions of those who help them treasonous, inciting violence against them, etc, to see malice. Or look to Trump’s frequent similar incitements of violence, stirring up of hatred towards immigrants, snatching people off the streets, outright lying, justifying the bombing of noncombatants in fishing boats, etc, to see malice. Both of these men have played social media like a fiddle, cynically playing off the basest fears of human beings for their own personal enrichment, and it has given them extraordinary power and wealth, all while feigning being good people.
If that isn’t malice, what is?
In this case, it is a huge stretch to ascribe DOGE to incompetence or to stupidity. Thus, we CAN ascribe it to malice.
Elon Musk and Donald Trump are many things, but they are NOT stupid and NOT incompetent. Elon is the richest man in the world running some of the most innovative and important companies in the world. Donald Trump has managed to get elected twice despite the fact (because of the fact?) that he a serial liar and a convicted criminal.
They and other actors involved have demonstrated extraordinary malice, time and time again.
It is safe to ascribe this one to malice. And Hanlon's Razor holds.
I do not like the man. I find his behavior to be corrupt, immoral, and unethical.
And I also do not hesitate for one moment to admit that he is a singular figure in history who has a deep understanding of human beings and how to exploit them. That may not be classic-elite-intellectual-book-smartness, but it is some kind of smartness, and far from stupid.
I’m not defending the Faroese here (nor casting aspersions on them, either), more just saying that it’s your responsibility to research the customs of the places to which you travel, and to not go if you think you might not like what you see.
Yes, all LLM caveats apply. Due your diligence. But they are quite good at this now.
And then this post today which makes a very strong case for it. (Yes, a VM isn’t an entire OS, Yes, it would be lighter weight than a complete OS. Yes, it would be industry-wide. Yes, we’d likely use an existing OS or codebase to start. Yes, nuance.)
Perhaps we are not so very different?