joelfried

Of course in that order!

Step 3: Rehire key personnel at lower cost than whomever was fired in Step 1. Step 4: Take credit for cost reductions . . . and give yourself a raise!

My experience here (also Claude user) is that the model uses different tools in different contexts. I see rg more on frontend and grep more on backend work. I imagine it defaults to using the tool it has more learning around within the contexts it's reaching for and since for the most part it's 6 of one or half a dozen of the other you'll see environment specific usages for these tools in claude for now. I imagine eventually it'll standardize but we're early yet on such things.

If you'd told me a decade ago I'd finally learn some sed in 26 because I'd want to understand what the AI was doing I'd have told you you were crazy . . .

Of course they do - they're in the credentialing business.

Would a smart AI accept such foolishness? I doubt it. It'll still use something deterministic under the hood - it'll just have a conversational abstraction layer for talking to the Product person writing up requirements.

We used to have to be able to communicate with other humans to build something. It seems to me that's what they're trying to take out of the loop by doing the things that humans do: talk to other humans and give them what they're asking for.

I too am not a fan of the dystopias we're ending up in.

Seems like it's time to remove links to outdated versions. Replace them with your resume?

In 2001 websites weren't what they are today. It was 5 years before jQuery's initial release . . . people needed to learn the proper terms somewhere in those days.

They would fine them by having a court case and saying they are guilty and owe money. Collecting on it would be awfully difficult, but you know, people do like trips to Europe.

That said, I think fining the company seems pretty plausible. They won't, but it'd be nice if they did.

That sounds amazing! As a founder I'd be over the moon for it.

Sounds super unique. Please include me too if you do any public follow up? I'd actually enjoy reading those, myself as I've collected folktale collections for years!

I see no mention of race or location

Location: "Think about Japan", "Compare that to the US" - this is a pretty straightforward comparison by location about culture based on location.

It presumes a bunch and I'm grunching (and showing my age by using that term), and I'm not trying to disagree with you . . . just highlight the comparison you said you could not see.

Thank you for doing this important work!

How do you source lightbulbs? I have yet to find a reliable LED bulb that doesn't hum or flicker on a dimmer despite being advertised as "dimmable" . . .

You think there's law on the books that forces companies to speak honestly? And that someone is going to enforce it?

Yes, Ms. Pacman has the DDs, which is why PacMan himself gives her the D.

3 Ds.

If they like sports at all you absolutely know they will.

Here you go: https://www.simplypsychology.org/emotional-labor.html

Hochschild (1983) suggested that jobs requiring more emotional labor are performed primarily by women. These jobs typically involve creating feelings of well-being or affirmation in others – responsibilities usually assigned to women.

Hochschild, A. (1983). 1983 The managed heart. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Should we know what "link in bio" means? How is that a "personal dashboard"?

The "fall guy" problem strikes me as nontrivial. Even if you add to the law that the CEO always has liability for any data leak, a sufficiently well capitalized company run by someone aware of the liability would simply create a shell company that owns all of that data. You could disallow company transmission of said data at all but that is going to cause problems when trying to actually verify said information . . .

We'd almost certainly have to write a new one, but there are several straightforward ways to do it if we had the political will. An off the cuff example that could certainly be improved:

Definitions: Government Identification Data includes Social Security Number. Bulk Extraction means any removal of data more than element by element. Unauthorized Third party means any person who the Company does not intend to grant access to. Intentionally Retaining means that a company chooses to ask clients to supply information which is then saved in a way accessible to the company for any reason in the future.

Law: Any company maintaining Government Identification Data must select someone as personally liable for the security of said data. If the company does not have a person who accepts personally liability, this liability transfers to the Chief Executive Officer of the company. In order for the liability to be considered transferred, the Company most keep on file a notarized copy of an affidavit accepting such liability Any company intentionally retaining any Government Identification Data must do so in a system that does not allow for Bulk Extraction by any Unauthorized Third Party. Failure to do so is considered Willful Negligence on the part of the company. Any company guilty of Willful Negligence herein described must forfeit the greater of 15% of their previous yearly revenue or 5 times the Gross Annual Compensation of the most compensated employee. In addition, whomever the company has selected as outlined above shall be incarcerated for no less than 12 months and no more than 60 months.

I haven't been formally diagnosed but I'm definitely on the very low end of visualization. But I'll answer for myself:

While I'm dreaming and unaware that I'm dreaming, it's like I'm in real life. As soon as I start to wake up at all, everything fades to black almost instantly. I recall the experience as if I lived it though dreams are strange so it's far less consistent than a normal narrative.

What kind of memories? I often completely fail to encode and remember highly visual details - like what color hair someone has, what shirt they were wearing, and so on. But I could recall the name of the building in which my college showed the Matrix in the fall of 1999 because I could remember which way I walked there.

I recall audio strongly and can hear the voices of various characters in my head. I can do passable impressions of quite a few characters. I can tell you the story in detail, but if something hinges on a visual cue I will completely fail there.

I mostly talk to myself in my head. It's a running narrative. If you'd like a specific example, give me something more meaningful than "imagining".

If I want to read something and retain it well, I will hear it in my head in my internal voice as I'm reading.

There's yellow squiggly underneath userShouldPay(apiKey) that reads:

userShouldPay(apiKey) always evaluates to True.

According to The Telegraph, they're researching how to do it in the UK: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/07/27/apple-tv-plo...

Only if there's no repetition . . .

I'll pay you $5 for gold teeth and make a tidy profit. This article from 2019[1] said $40-92 per crown. Multiply by 1.6 based on the way gold has appreciated since 2019[2] and that's $65-147 or so per tooth.

[1] https://thegoldcenter.com/how-much-gold-is-in-a-dental-crown... [2] https://www.macrotrends.net/1333/historical-gold-prices-100-...

Here you go: https://www.ic3.gov/Media/Y2022/PSA221221

I would advise you to plan out the options to the best of your ability, then have a long conversation with your spouse presenting those options.

It was not true of this world 150 years ago that any person with sufficient learning could tap buttons to create an experience to be found in the hand of the majority of living humans.

I agree power and greed go hand in hand - absolute power corrupts, absolutely - but this bit? This is new.

I've never really seen Word as anything other than inferior, having cut my teeth on WordPerfect.

Others have posted their favorite shortcuts (and Reveal Codes truly was magical); my most used ones I haven't seen mentioned were Ctrl+Shift+F1 and Alt+Shift+F1. IIRC, those were spell check and thesaurus, respectively.

RIP Bruce, you made the world a better place for millions.

The point was that nobody would consider a person acting under threat of death to be making freely willed choices, so defining choice in the naive and reductive sense that was suggested is just incorrect because it cannot exclude this case. Therefore this naive and reductive definition cannot be what people mean by "choice" in the context of free will.

I disagree with this characterization as it omits entirely the moral culpability central to Frankfurt's argumentation. Frankfurt cases are about moral culpability[1]. I did not refer to morality or culpability but only the base naive case given that the question was "why can't you have both?" and I think the epistemic force of the base case is nontrivial.

I think your error here is that you are presuming:

(a) If you are acting under threat of death, you cannot do otherwise but save your life. (b) When you define freedom as the ability to have done otherwise, you cannot be free in the case of (a). (c) All cases of human choice must be free. (d) Given (b) and (c), the definition must be incorrect.

As the other person in the thread pointed out, some people can choose death in the face of death or some other choice. It has happened many times throughout history. So saying "you must save your life" is outright false. Some people choose one option, some people choose another. This has no force on the definition of freedom.

Even if you say in that specific case a person is not free because they could not do otherwise, it does not follow that the definition of freedom can't handle the case. It may follow that the person is not blameworthy - which is what Frankfurt was getting at - but that's nowhere near saying that the theory can't handle the case at all. Some might say the person under threat of death could do otherwise, some might say the person under threat of death could not do otherwise. That's not fatal to anything, it just shows the definition is incomplete.

[1] Wikipedia covers it somewhat here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_cases#Frankfurt's_ob... but if you don't like Wikipedia for some reason, the intro to this 2007 paper https://digitalcommons.unf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1... gives more or less the same description.

Many would say you can't have free will in a deterministic world because free will is about selecting one option from many. If there is no alternative option -- because the universe is completely determined -- how can you have any choice? You were always going to do exactly what it was previously determined you were always going to do.