rnvannatta

I have primarily used Fable 5, Fable 5.1, and now Opus 5.5. I never use shift-tab to enter plan mode personally. My general workflow is chatting with the machine to work out fiddly bits, then /plan to get everything in one document, and reviewing the plan.

/plan is still useful, I still need to review what it's going to do and still make revisions. But there's two phases: hammer out key design decisions then write and amend the document.

In addition to positive reinforcement on the style I wanted for output, I tried your suggestion to tell Claude Fable to think Claudese in its thoughts, and that sadly got the session immediately flagged as too risky for Fable to handle, suggesting I downgrade to Opus. Several tweaks still consistently flagged it until I removed the directive about its thinking.

So I guess Anthropic wants zero mention of thoughts with Fable: they're worried about anything that remotely smells like distillation but only with Fable.

In order to be at risk for Lyme disease the tick has to have fed on you for a couple days, in which case its plump and more noticeable. If a tick has feasted on you for a few days, it's a singular pill of doxycycline at this stage to not get ill.

Similar to rabies, Lyme disease itself slowly disseminates through the flesh over months, by the time it's spread you are very sick.

To get alpha-gal allergy you need to get bitten by the lone star tick. It's caused by the alpha-gal in the tick's saliva. Even a nymph can do it though.

The 'have you traveled' question is much less useful with Lyme disease, because it takes potentially years to kick in. It's still important to ask, but it's not going to be surefire for Lyme disease.

The two winning instruction sets are the RISCiest CISC, x86, and the CISCiest RISC, arm.

When you unwrap UVs the interpolation issue is taken care of. The UV map accounts for it.

It's only for tessellation like subdivision surfaces where something like this would be nifty That is to say, this is mainly nifty for the DCC tool renderer itself to render slightly faster.

It's not really that simple, barycentric coordinate access is relatively recent. It's asking the rasterizer for information and transforming that information into barycentric coordinates, and the correspondence of barycentric coordinates to vertices is unstable without further hardware support or further shader trickery. In the case of AMD gpus, it's only RDNA2 and later that have hardware support for stable barycentrics.

And you're right that this has been thought of. There are other approaches for bilinearly interpolating quads that have been historically used, but they require passing extra data through the vertex shader and thus often splitting vertices.

Well, a rotation matrix doesn't require doing 2 half rotations, and doesn't require reaching into the 4th dimension in such a way that it gets perfectly cancelled out. It doesn't require abstract analogies about cubes with strings glued to them or people holding coffee cups.

With some familiarity with linear algebra, it's easy to derive the formula for constructing a rotation matrix. You just have to think about what the operation does to the axes. The derivation for quaternion rotation is far more abstract, by virtue of the operation we actually care about involving a sandwich of multiplications with unclear 4 dimensional meaning. There's no hyperspheres with a rotation matrix.

Augmenting your space to handle not just rotations & scaling, but translations is easy for matrices, just requires a homogeneous coordinate and you get 4x4 matrices with intuitive columns.

Augmenting quaternions to handle translations requires the 8 dimensional dual-quaternions.

I definitely like geometric algebra, it's a very nice continuation of topics in linear algebra and makes it clear why things like normals behave differently from standard vectors. But I don't use it every day. I use standard linear algebra every day.

To add to your comment, quaternions predate rotational matrix operators by a considerable amount (1843 vs not exactly clear, ~1900 with Peano or ~1920 with Weyl), despite quaternions being much more challenging to manipulate. There are definitely simpler ways to view the same things.

There was a cottage industry of exotic hypercomplex numbers that disappeared when linear algebra matured to eclipse them.

In fact, Maxwell's Equations were originally derived with quaternions.

I was just talking with my wife about this. She's from southern China and went to a restaurant in north China with her northern colleagues. There they ordered cicada pupa, which were the most expensive thing on the menu.

With a lot of these expensive Chinese foods, there's an overlap with traditional Chinese medicine, as seen in bird's nest soup, black chicken meat, and such. And indeed, they convinced her to try one, saying that cicada are great for health and such. She felt guilty given that it was such an expensive dish, so she tried one. Reliving that memory made her feel nauseous.