roarcher

I want it to tell me if it thinks I'm wrong, sure. I do not want it act on that opinion explicitly against my wishes.

And in this case, I was not wrong. The "recommended" solution was Opus 5's typical overengineering for a use case that would never be needed.

I used the Claude CLI a lot until recently. A couple weeks ago I told Opus 5 to do something different from its "recommended" idea when planning a feature, and it straight up told me that my idea was wrong and went ahead and implemented its own instead.

I'm used to machines malfunctioning, but having one willfully disobey me, and even with a touch of disrespect, is just...what a time to be alive.

> In general, the more senior the employee, the more concerned they are.

In general, the more senior the employee, the more equity they have in the company.

I would love to be able to trust that a doctor knows more about my problem than I do, but every time I see one they clearly haven't even read the information I just told the nurse 15 minutes ago.

> you're declaring my thoughts meaningless

I said irrelevant, because your argument does not contradict the point that was being made. Your first comment was a list of scenarios that literally had nothing do with what you were replying to. And your "superset" comment was trying to shoot down a general observation about human behavior by pointing out that it isn't a mathematically rigorous model, as if it was ever intended or claimed to be. It is not my fault that nonsense and pedantry are irrelevant, but I'm sorry to inform you that they are.

> a conversation you admit to not understanding

I understand perfectly what you're saying. The source of my confusion is your insistence that it matters. It's like I told you that apples are edible and you keep insisting that they categorically aren't because some people don't like them, and also occasionally one of them might have a worm in it.

> trying to push me out of the conversation

My brother in Christ, all I want is for you to just stay in the conversation for once.

Anyway, this is pretty firmly in "playing chess with a pigeon" territory now. Have a good one.

Man what the hell are you even talking about? Nearly every one of your comments in this thread has been some sort of non-sequitur or is replying to an argument that nobody made. Your only fully coherent comment was the one with the superset idea, which boils down to "you can't say people who vote for communism and stand to gain from it are self-serving, because one of them might happen to be a saint whose only concern is the common good".

I'm getting tired of having to direct the conversation back to the actual topic. It's okay to just bow out when you're wrong, you don't have to continuously derail a conversation with bullshit just because you're out of your depth. You're not fooling anyone with it.

It's laughably naive to think that any significant number of people who vote for a system they think will personally benefit them are in fact doing so purely out of principle, and not at all because it will benefit them. However, as long as one such person exists, Group A is indeed a superset of self-serving people, and you are therefore correct in the most technical and irrelevant sense. Congratulations.

You seem to be missing the point. The person you originally replied to said that those who vote for communism for their own personal gain are self serving. Let's call those people Group A.

You then listed a bunch of people who might vote for it for some non-self-serving reason, let's call them Group B.

Your comment implies that the existence of Group B makes Group A not-self-serving, when in fact it is as irrelevant to Group A's motives as my grandmother being a bicycle.

> Btw, it's a bit rude to pattern-match a thought-terminating cliche followed by declaring your point of view to be objectively true.

I don't even know what you're trying to say here.

What if my grandmother was a bicycle? None of these change the fact that voting for a system to move resources from others to yourself is self serving.

You can debate whether it's justifiable or not, but it is self serving by definition.

I enjoy HN's brand of cynicism as much as the next guy, but this is ridiculous. Tobacco companies say that because governments require them to. They are not putting photos of diseased lungs on their cartons to "shock investors into buying their stock", whatever the hell that even means.

> Most open source fans are also hostile to copyrights existence and are openly IP abolitionists.

Open source licenses are only enforceable because of copyright law. How are you going to enforce GPL3 when you have no legal authority to say what people are allowed to do with your code?

The rocket they 3D print at the end isn't even the same as the one in the game. It has a curved body, but the game asset is a cylinder.

Even if all that is true, why shouldn't people be able to joke about it? Your sentiment is borderline AI worship.

> You can curtail the bandwagon effect by complaining.

I've observed the opposite--complaints are often more heavily downvoted than the original downvoted comment. The one I originally replied to is an example, at least at the moment.

A word of unsolicited advice: HNers are a prickly lot and will downvote without explanation because you stepped on some unknowable pet peeve of theirs that probably nobody else in the world shares. This happens all the time but you likely only notice when you happen to get downvoted before any upvotes and end up at 0 or -1. If your comment is reasonable, it will usually come back up.

But complaining about downvotes will certainly earn more of them.

The workers were not the decision makers.

> There are too many people here in the comments who act surprised

That may be so, but since the person they're responding to is not one of them, I don't see the relevance of their comment.

I agree. Please point to the one you're referring to.

So you agree with the person you're responding to, but you're attacking them for stating it with less melodrama than you would prefer? What a useless comment.

I find it to be both as well, as in "packed full of information, but most of it is worthless". Sentences so dense I have to read them three times, assembled into a five paragraph essay of "honest caveats" and "things worth knowing" in response to the simplest yes-or-no questions.

I presume you think having been punched in the face makes you special. I have too. It doesn't.

Zellij has a ton of chrome by default to make it discoverable for new users, but you can configure it so it only takes up one line at the bottom of your screen, like tmux. I like to also hit F11 to go fullscreen, which gets me a few more lines.

It also supports "layouts" which are similar to `tmuxinator` scripts. You can set up a bunch of tabs and split panes and run commands in each to start up your text editor, agent, git client, etc. The ability to instantly spin up my entire dev environment with everything just where I like it, configurable on a per-project basis, is what keeps me in the console instead of using desktop apps.

I agree. I'm saying that "just have kids younger" isn't a good solution to the risks of developmental defects, because it's usually merely a trade of that risk for a different one.

I get your point, but fighter pilots don't wear armor. There is no reasonable amount of it that can protect against cannons and missiles, and the added weight and bulk of even a bulletproof vest would make high-G-force maneuvers impractical for the pilot.

Perhaps, but that often means selecting a partner more quickly, which is another gamble with potentially terrible consequences.

I used to use em-dashes for explanatory clauses--like this one, for example--when using commas would make the sentence difficult to parse due to other nearby commas.

They're only a LinkedIn-ism when used to create an unduly dramatic juxtaposition for an otherwise mundane idea. But now they set off people's AI radar when used for any reason at all.

As a former em-dash enjoyer, I indeed feel your pain.

There's got to be a Weird Al song like this coming soon.

Oh. Oh no.

Oh god this has been driving me nuts since Opus 5 landed. Every docblock is filled with long-winded jargon explaining why this design is superior to some other design, which never existed as far as any dev who might read that comment is concerned.