SpaceNugget

This is also why I think it's baffling that they switched to auto mode by default. It's becoming harder to use Claude at least to help with improving at coding.

If I ask something like: "I'm building a simple X as a learning exercise, I'm writing the code so please only answer the question I'm asking and don't try to solve the problem directly. How does ..." There's a 30% chance it starts reading and writing code immediately and a 20% chance it argues with a "design decision" that will bite me in the non-existent future of my learning exercise. If I ask a follow up question, naively assuming that the context from my original question still stands without repeating, it will almost assuredly start making modifications to my code.

What do you mean wildcard domain? Are you perhaps confusing domain renewals with dns entries?

I think that's not obvious at all, and quite a personal preference. There's lots of assholes in the area with extremely loud cars who seem to think that way. I have never thought the sound of a engine is cool, pleasant, exciting, impressive, or anything remotely like that. I do like adrenaline and driving fast in almost every form of vehicle, but if I could have a silent maglev sportbike that drove just like a combustion based bike I would choose it in a heartbeat.

That's a false dichotomy. If you launder rambling pointless prose through the llm you don't trade the personality of the writing for a well reasoned argument with clear points, you just lost the personality and gained shitty writing. LLMs aren't magic and can't make your point for you if you don't have one to begin with in the prompt. Garbage in garbage out.

I have seen it expressed here a few times, but these LLM blog post tech proposal things really give off the vibe (pun intended) of someone being gaslit by claude into thinking they are onto something really important or innovative. It feels really weird reading it. A bit like reading someone's somewhat self aggrandizing journal entries, or walking in on someone... Doin' stuff. I don't hate LLMs, they have made some aspects of my job easier for sure, but I think some people are still pretty off base on where and how it's acceptable to offload to an LLM.

I want to clarify that no, Starlink _really_ does not "drastically reduce the risk" of remote outdoor activities. Looking it up, Starlink doesn't even provide it's gps location to connected devices. And regardless, actually rugged communication capable handheld gps units already exist and have for a while. And they don't require that you bring a whole satellite dish and some kind of battery pack with you on your wilderness expeditions. What's actually idiotic, and getting lots of people in serious trouble these days, is going out unprepared. Don't risk your life, or search and rescue workers lives because you think you'll use Claude or whatever to figure it out while you are out there.

Things can go very wrong very quickly. If you go do risky activities far from help you should be prepared and know what you are getting yourself into and how to get yourself back out of it ahead of time.

They said exercise doesn't help them with reducing the feeling of hunger. I don't know why they thought it would, because generally if you do a lot of exercise you get more hungry not less hungry, but regardless, you are responding to something that wasn't said.

If there is a large group of people who use a term like "anti-fascist" as a tag line it no longer is a literal representation of the words. Just like how you wouldn't say that a guy rolling coal in a lifted pickup with a confederate flag and an AR mounted in the window who calls himself a "freedom fighter" is literally fighting for freedom.

Otherwise you will just be talking past people who are interpreting it to mean something else. Which of course you are free to do if you don't think what you are trying to say has enough value to be worth avoiding the miscommunication.

The sentence structures they use are always the same. Plus, the use of "real" here is "real" awkward and LLMs use it like that all the time.

> Why are you attributing this to me

Because you wrote:

> If the opposition simply seeks to silence you, rather than to argue against you, how are they not malicious?

in response to:

> The industry should only be allowed to comment after the laws have been written and fulfill the goals of European citizens.

Where it's clear from your framing of an "opposition trying to silence you" that you think the industry lobby has at least some right to be heard before the council votes on policy. Which is something the statement you are replying to clearly doesn't agree with. And rather than accept that there is a disagreement of the purpose of the council or the acceptability of industry lobbyists influencing law or what not, you just frame it as a moral evil (maliciousness) on the part of the other commenter. A good faith reading of the comment you replied to has so many non-malicious interpretations.

Side note: if your comment implies something hard enough (intentionally or not) that multiple people are "windmill-tilting" against something that you think you aren't saying, it deserves some reflection on whether you may have miscommunicated your point.

You seem to be arguing under the presupposition that there are two equal entities, industry lobbies and everyone else, and somehow that division of viewpoints gets equal consideration from the governing body.

The other person is arguing that those two entities are not equal and should not have equal weight in affecting the decisions of the European commission.

Calling them malicious for having a different view of the _purpose_ of the commission is kind of wrong (it's independent of being malicious), and from the outside just makes you look dishonest.

I'm sorry to burst your bubble but I don't think your feature request had anything to do with when apple implemented call allow listing. It's been a thing forever and they were surly aware of it since the iPhone first came out

If I'm refuting that everyone in the world knows x, by showing a large population that doesn't know x. Saying that there is some other population that does know x makes no difference.

GP: all trucks are red. Me: no, here's some trucks that are blue. You: but look how many red trucks I see over there.

> Everyone in the world knows teams like Real Madrid or Barcelona

I promise you that if you go canvas a random selection of North Americans you would be astonished at how many do not recognize "Barcelona" as anything but a city. Football is really not very popular there. Though in recent years it is slowly becoming a bit more watched.

Beverse they are benefitting from the financial situation of owning the ai companies that are getting pumped massive amounts of money, not from the debated usefulness of the output of the LLMs.