cladopa

Imho when talking about women giving them too much time and attention is a bad idea. They don't value what is free and abundant.

When I was young and poor(but smart, beautiful and tall) I gave some women I was interested on too much time and attention and it looked like they were not interested t all. The women I gave the less attention (that I was not that interested in) usually got deeply in love with me and I had great time with them.

I am European, it is different from living in the US or Asia(I have also lived there). In the US you have way more opportunities professionally but people live isolated from each other. They don't have so many common spaces like in Europe.

Later when I got more money and status the women that ignored me came after me. They only valued my time and attention after it was zero. When I ignored them as I was genuinely busy they got in love as well.

I also made friends around the world easily and probably the best reason is because I already had friends and I did not need new ones.

The best way to make friends and lovers is not to need them at all. You make friends or lover when you don't try to make friends and people just have a great time with you.

So beware about thinking about idealistic ideas about life that have been never tested. There are things about humans that were decided when we were living in tribes.

It probably has something to do with the need to touch someone first.

Japanese people really hate physical contact, or any contact by the way.

OpensCAD and FreeCAD.

I learned OpensCAD manually but it was so painful because you needed to take into account the most minimal and ridiculous thing using code, so I used Freecad in the end that is way more intuitive and fast with graphical tools.

With code like OpenScad it was just too exhausting just to have to think rationally every single detail. And you spent hours doing the most minimal project.

Then LLMs appeared...

Now I use OpenSCAD a lot because with LLMs you have the absolute control that code gives you without the pain of using your logical/rational mind all the time and taking 1/20 of the time for that.

I create my own furniture as hobby. Mostly I use standard IKEA metallic pieces, standard metric screws.

I generate paper blueprints automatically of how the wood panels must be cut and they cut it for me. My Blueprints are pdfs that I print very similar to IKEA blueprints so the one that cuts the wood can not make a mistake. I choose and provide the panels myself.

It is ridiculous how easy it is now with LLMs to do all of that. I can do a new design in a couple hours, including the pdfs. Most of the code is already created and I just have to reuse it.

I use Claude Code. From time to time I voluntarily teach children to do just that. Some of them are really good after a couple hours of instruction and some mentoring.

As someone who has lived in islands like Ibiza and Lanzarote, it is shocking for me the use of "an island is an isolated place" mentality.

Maybe is people used to drive for moving, not imagining anything else as a possibility. People living in islands learn to pilot a boat and boom, you can move all around the Mediterranean and even the world.

Islands in the Mediterranean were the most connected things you could get in ancient times. And islands today continue being one of the most connected things there are.

In Ibiza there was ancient contact with Romans, Greeks, Carthaginians, Arabs, vikings, and later people from Aragon, Napoli, and Turks, then the French, the British, the Germans, then the Americans. The American hippies that hid from Vietnam occupied the island, Russian oligarchs on their yachts and later the Germans.

Almost everybody there living from tourism and commerce, not specially isolated disciplines.

The Canary Islands were the essential link between America and Europe.

It is over ten times cheaper to transport anything by sea than by land. Go to Ethiopia or Central African Republic to see how not having access to sea is a dramatic thing for a country.

In the drugs loving country that is the USA, now more than 25% of households have someone taking some "ozempic" like drug for dealing with obesity.

The consequence is that the Homer Simpsons do not feel the need to drink alcohol anymore.

We created a system for measuring future trends for a food company and the trend of people avoiding sugars and alcohol is the strongest now.

For people outside the US to understand, you need to know that all foods in the US supermarkets are flooded with sugars in a way that is hard to comprehend unless you come from outside. You have the highest obesity levels in the world.

Those drugs have secondary effects but obesity has too, and they work very well.

Because it is not pleasurable at all? When I was a kid, I saw a couple of friends get addicted to smoking, from the first cigarette. I have seen dozens of acquaintances as well because I was interested in the process.

Even myself tested his firsts cigarettes.

It was so painful. The body reacts violently when you try to poison it. Severe coughs that people try to hide, trying to appear strong while they could not help it making impulsive movements. It tastes like sh*ht, it burns your lungs. You stink, your clothing and breath stinks.

It takes a lot of concious and painful work in order to force your body into accepting that.

For me it was pure stupidity to make a deliberate effort to get hooked into an addiction, so I just did not continue.

I couldn't help but see that this way. I read a lot so I knew what was coming next. It is like casinos not inviting mathematicians or physicist to conferences, as because of their training, they can see the probabilities inside out and never fall in the emotional trap.

Well, the Romans also used Carpenters for building things on Stone, only that wood is much harder to preserve.

In Spain multiple big ferris wells were found in mines and also some parts of machines that were using to pulverise rock. There were machines for hammering the rock using water, made in wood.

The Romans probably used machines for polishing the stone also so it could fit with other stones, as they did everything this way and those machines were done also with wood.

We also know that they had machines for lifting the enormous rocks as we can see the marks that the gripper left, done in wood.

And every arch done in Stone needs to be build first in wood. The romans loved to use the same arch so they could reuse the wood. The romans standardised everything so everything could be reused or mass produced.

AI is not the problem here, but the difference in deep beliefs of the company founders.

When I had partners in my business I studied them first deeply like I was going to marry them because I WAS going to marry them!

You should agree on your values or else the company will go nowhere. One founder will raw one way and the other the opposite making the boat to stay in the same place.

I have a software company and the opposite problem: I am obsessive about testing and meta programming. We write way more testing code than code, we automate everything with meta programming.

It was clear several times that we tested and automated way more than necessary. We automated things that only used once for example(although we used later multiple times on other projects).

So we had not the usual problems than companies have like bloat or security vulnerabilities but we had the problem of having software that was was super expensive because we did double or triple the code than the competition with tests that developers hated(they are boring to write). Our software took also way more time to market.

Companies love to buy the cheapest they can today and tomorrow we will see, so that put us in a difficult position. It was specially hard at first, but then this principles gave us an edge(because most companies would compromise early and not reap the benefits later).

Had I a business partner with a different mindset and beliefs, it would have been impossible to me not to change course of the boat in hard times.

BTW we use LLMs with great success. It let's us test even more spending way less than before.

I don't know the specific case of Switzerland but I worked in a University in Spain when I was student with servers and stuff and our serious software was never Microsoft's. It was from big Mainframes like IBM or Sun Microsystems servers. We ported that software to Linux and it took very little time, saving us a lot of money with small machines.

That was more than 20 years ago.

Half of our laboratory PC rooms used Linux or BSD and we had licences like Matlab for Linux early on. The other half used Windows and yes, we could get very good license prices from Microsoft precisely because we had so many Linux machines. It was almost free.

You could even say that Microsoft spent money on us trying to buy the University sales gatekeepers with things like free expensive travel to States' conferences, free laptops and stuff.

We were probably not a normal University as we were a technical University and regularly organised conferences inviting people like Stallman.(Our technical University also managed the servers of the Humanities side of the University).

It was not that hard. Today, with so many programs running in Webassembly, it should be much easier.

>Is it just political symbolic migration because they have anything better to do with tax payers money?

Usually when you replace privative software with open source you spend 10x or so less in licenses. The problem being that the open source software is not as capable as the privative.

I did not understood why instead of spending 10 times less with open source, you spend half and pay for the necessary capabilities improving the open source software.

I understood it later. In the past it was a scheme lots of politicians used for getting negotiation power against Microsoft. Digital sovereignty was very down the priorities list compared to getting a good price.

Now, after the Ukraine war, and Trump actively using the US dependence against Europe, digital sovereignty is a very real issue, even critical.

So you believe that writers are not making the necessary effort and write using LLMs, so you then use an automatic LLM to filter it as a reader(because you don't care as a reader and don't want to make the effort manually).

So this way there will be a lot of false positives like with school assignments.

I think a better solution would be to have a network of people that you trust manually read and label texts instead, so this way no machines are used and you don't need to read a text that 100 of your trusted friend/trusted readers flagged as artifitial.

By the way, this man does not care about AI slop. He cares about AI usage. In the same way there is very good code created with the help of LLMs, albeit a minority like Linus Towards says, there will be very good writing created with the help of LLMs.

It is not a big deal. Since the invention of the printing press any important book has been duplicated by thousands, tens of thousands or even million of units.

Just taking one of those and "destroying them"(it is not destroyed, a digital copy with the ability of doing millions of copies is stored somewhere) is not problematic for Humanity.

By the way, I always search for second hand books. Most of the books there are garbage. Most people clean their shelves with the books they don't care about, but preserve the ones that are good. If they are young people that inherited a house and don't care about books, they pick and sell the good ones, giving away the bad books.

If you go to a recycling centre, the garbage to quality ratio is over 100 or more. That is, for every 100 books that are garbage there is one good quality book. It is very rare to find a jewel there.

I have released some of my projects as Open Source, I also have a company with privative software.

Claude and AI partners have taken all what they could from the Open Source projects without giving credit or respecting the licenses. They have increased the traffic on websites in an absolute disrespectful way increasing the hosting cost in inefficient and ridiculous ways.

They have taken all the important books and not asked permission from the authors.

Fair enough. Fair use.

Of course I would create a competitor software to Claude or any others if I could. Using Claude(and others) of course.

I am not paying you 200 dollars/month for you to tell me that I could not create code that competes with you. If you try to go to court in Europe with this you will lose.

It is just the same fair use you proclaim for taking the data from others.

It is not non sense. I am spaniard myself and I did not understood what he was talking about until I saw the correction(is this a club name or something?).

If I want to talk about "Seattle" and use "Siadol" a lot of people are not going to understand.

As someone who has helped drug addicts in an organisation called "Proyecto Hombre" in Spain you probably don't understand how hard is to help someone in this situation and that sometimes you CAN'T.

It is very typical that when someone gets on drugs even the father of the person stops trying to help after several failed trials. Only the mothers stay. And it is so painful to watch. The kind of abuses mothers tolerate from their children.

Substances destroys the typical regulating behaviour of the brain. They literally can't see the harm they do to others. You usually can't help them until they hit rock bottom and open a window for you to intervene.

For helping you need knowledge and training and "trying to help" without it could do more harm than good.

About the moral obligation to help the drug addicts, as "social justice", I would call this "injustice". Here is the typical situation: Someone takes drugs in a social group because is "cool". In the same group there is someone that decides not to take them. He is humiliated by the group and it takes a lot of work. One of the members of the group gets addicted, do terrible things and asks for help.

It is usual that the one that did not take drugs, or the brother in the family ask the question "why are you helping this person that decided to go this way herself?" "Why are you expending like 10x more resources in this person that did everything wrong than in me when did everything well (studied instead of earning easy money selling drugs, that had to withstand the pressure and humiliations by the group).

Drugs are super expensive and addicts will do anything to get their dose, supporting the addicts usually takes all the resources from a family, neglecting the resources to other members of the family. If the State provides the support, the same thing happens. Should the State spend exorbitant resources that the rest of the society has to pay taking the resources from everyone that needs them?