adastra22

I have never once had it work for me. Usually it feels like the model got a lobotomy. If I'm working with the model in a chat interface, I feel like we only really start to groove around 500k or so, at which point it knows my quirks and style, and is interpreting my intent correctly. That never, in my experience, survives compaction.

Maybe things are better now. It's been a while since I've compacted a conversation.

I assume that is only if compact is turned on? I never use compaction.

They don't live on top of the hill, all the time. The local chief, maybe. It is a defensive place to retreat to when under attack.

The latter, clearly? It is far more valuable to have a (badly) working system you can prod and probe than work from fantasy.

The Mythical Token-Minute.

Best against other AI output, still not even close to what a human would write.

That's a much more succinct way to put it, thank you.

In my case my marriage was falling apart, among other things, due to problems that ultimately stemmed from my ADHD. Therapy helped me fix my marriage, but only medication corrected the behaviors that led to that situation & kept me from repeating the same mistakes.

Do you not see the problems that arise here? Are we losing our accumulated engineering best practice knowledge? Standardized, common, highly reviewed subsystems provide working engineering know-how and accumulated lessons learned. Not even the best AI systems can keep that many considerations in mind when re-spinning code.

If this is your default assumption, I hope I never have to rely on code you generate.

GPT-5.6 Sol Ultrafast is running on Cerebras hardware.

How have I been inconsistent?

Neither can Gemini.

Verify against what? What I want verification against lives in the human's head, not the repo.

Are we now in a situation where all code is disposable, throwaway things with no long-lived projects?

We're talking about a programming language. Languages, and their compilers, evolve over time. Where is this one headed?

Legibility is not the concern. The issue is whether the point the docs are making are the actual point the author is concerned with.

Yeah that's a part of it for sure. Experience varies and replication is really difficult.

The reasons for my expectation that therapy doesn't address ADHD symptoms generally (I know it didn't for me) is more fundamental though: therapy is helpful in making conscious changes. The whole point of ADHD is that you're not consciously aware of the decisions you make. Any therapy that tries to address the root cause of ADHD issues boils down to "try to remember to not do that" when the f'ing point is that I will not remember, and I can't control that. Stimulants fix this. No amount of therapy makes it better.

Where therapy is helpful is learning to live with the disability and to prevent or contain the worst outcomes that can result. Therapy helps manage symptoms, not address the root cause. Which is good because even stimulants are not perfect, and usually by the time you're seeking help there's a lot of damage already. But they're not addressing the same thing.