fjdjshsh

I doubt there any reasonable people outside the USA that still think Trump's regime is reasonable. Reasonable people of the USA, why would anyone still think this regime is OK? Please explain as I'm completely dumbfounded

Would "decrease randomness" be acceptable to you?

The problem in Scarf's case wasn't Haskell's type system, but the long compile time for even small changes.

I thought that was part of the appeal of this. There's something spooky and ironic about it.

I hate the marketing-selling-linkedn style as much as anyone, but I don't think it's an LLM thing in particular. It's a style that existed before LLMs and it's very easy to make LLMs avoid it with one or two prompt paragraphs.

For what it's worth, I didn't get that vibe reading this post.

I feel this is a lazy, straw-manning comment.

Maybe it's not something they would "typically miss", but, from proof by existence, it's something they sometimes miss.

It does speak to the benefits of using lean in that you don't need to be clever about the different examples you test.

>The strike by Alibaba is described as a "distillation" effort, which Anthropic has said involves training a less capable model on the outputs of a stronger one.

Claude used TB of content without permission to train their model and it was ok for them. Now someone else uses the output of a Claude model to train model and they cry foul.

Latinamerican here. When you talk about "adversarial country" I think of the USA (they can kidnap a president, kill people on boats without a trial, etc) and not China. YMMV for different regions.

>I'm still a AI skeptic

What does this mean in June 2026 wrt coding?

To me it sounds like being a "rice cooker skeptic". Some people don't like using rice cookers, some do.

Here it's important to take into account the consequences / cost of false positive vs false negatives.

If you're building a dashboard for visualizing something fun (hot dog sales in sport games) then the corner case error has low cost. I'm happy having this vibe coded dashboard that works 99/100 and my world is better with it existing.

Crypto is on the opposite scale (and I'm surprised this blog doesn't realize it): 9999/10000 isn't good enough because the corner cases have dire consequences. So, yeah, bad example for vibe coding

Read parent's post carefully. The post starts by saying that discussing whether they have subjective emotion is a waste of time, so the post is definitely NOT saying that Claude has emotions.

I've had good experiences with Cursor so far and it's my main IDE. I've noticed some UI changes, but I've switched fast and they didn't bug me

I find talking about X psychosis (or generally using mental illness metaphors) unproductive. It sets up the conversation to be "nothing else to do with this person".

Maybe the problem is you, but you won't figure that out if you think the other person has psychosis.

For example, maybe you need to do a better job explaining, changing your language, simplifying things, being more concrete with consequences.

Or maybe you aren't understanding that the other person has different objectives/ loss function that makes them make seemingly weird conclusions.

The USA has the biggest incarceration rate of any developed country.

If you say that it's hard to get the state to put you in jail, then the only way I can reconcile that with facts is that people in the USA commit crimes X10 times more than in other developed countries.

Do you think that's true?