gehsty

Super interesting to hear your experience, I agree that it is very dystopian. I have put up with it (with effect on my performance and somewhat my mental health), to be around my family more. Things like doing pick up and drop offs at school consistently has been wonderful.

Amazing story congrats on being a great coach - this kids will remember you and that experience.

My experience on tech as a parent (3 kids under 10), I find their time on iPads etc playing games, music and audio books to be good for them (they don’t get grumpy after it, and particularly playing Roblox with their friends online is great fun - real halo 3 vibes for me), watching shows they get quite difficult after if the have watched for extended periods (smaller the screen the worse it is), but if they get access to anything with a constant scroll / stream of things they go haywire. My son found YouTube on his nanas iPad and mainlined it for half an hour and then went crazy. My daughter lost it over browsing Amazon.

We are withholding social networks & scrolling video as long as humanly possible, but difficult when you don’t want them to miss out on anything, and there’s an element of controlled exposure…

Again great story, makes me want to sign up as a coach. Sorry for the tangent!

I don’t think so, I think he would have thought Apple could deliver a better user experience (LLM Siri) and gone into it whole heartedly.

My perspective is that Apple doesn’t hold off to see what the market is doing. They hold off until technology can create a viable, usable product (iPhone was ahead of anything, Vision Pro less impactful but similarly advanced, iPod was smaller than any hdd based mp3 player - just some examples where they pushed the boundaries).

They 100% missed the transformer being a technology that could create a viable product, and I don’t think Steve Jobs would have missed that.

100% would hate to see the current state of Siri, and then even worse that others are doing what Apple can’t.

I agree that I don’t think he’d want slop, but I do think he would want Siri to be like ChatGPTs conversations, and he would have loved Claude Code.

He would have understood the potential of LLMs straight away. If he would have delivered a successful product no one knows but 100% would have understood how LLMs could become another interface to computers.

I think his pitch would have been like garage band but for making apps “now anyone can make an app” feels very Jobsian.

It is insane that they have this little of a handle on their buildout. It makes the $600B feel even more empheral.

I think that Claude can figure that out though - through the conversation Claude should figure out if this is an enterprise app, a hobby app or whatever, as it decides on how to code the thing.

Do you think that Anthropic don’t include things like this in their harness / system prompts? I feel like this kind of prompts are uneccessary with Opus 4.5 onwards, obviously based on my own experience (I used to do this, on switching to opus I stopped and have implemented more complex problems, more successfully).

I am having the most success describing what I want as humanly as possible, describing outcomes clearly, making sure the plan is good and clearing context before implementing.

I think this was more of a thing on older models. Since I started using Opus 4.5 I have not felt the need to do this.

Doesn’t Claude code do this by switching between edit mode and plan mode?

FWIW I have had significant improvements by clearing context then implementing the plan. Seems like it stops Claude getting hung up on something.

I don’t get this, I’d rather talk about money upfront, I have a number I know I need to be at and I ask for at least that. Imagine spending the time and energy interviewing etc and then finding out that salary is far far below expectations?

More straightforwardly, people are generally very forgiving when people make mistakes, and very unforgiving when computers do. Look at how we view a person accidentally killing someone in a traffic accident versus when a robotaxi does it. Having people run it on their own hardware makes them take responsibility for it mentally, so gives a lot of leeway for errors.

Alloying copper with silver and lead is sophisticated. How could they have got to this without structured research, experimentation, controlled manufacturing. It’s a lot closer to our drill bits now than a sharpened bone.

It sounds very un-archaeologist to not investigate the gap between artifact and tooling (like that’s their job?).

For me the ‘archaeology not accepting things’ has been fueled by Graham Hancock etc. Archaeology is a lot like science, it sits on a body of research, if there’s evidence of advanced tooling and it’s properly investigated and written up, verified, no archaeologist would deny it.

I think it’s fair to say it depends on what you are hosting and why - personal projects and curiosities, fun! Self hosting business critical data and customer data, minefield! Currently self hosting some little projects, using cloudflare tunnels to serve to the web, and it is surprisingly fun and efficient!

Wealth and the party scene (drugs and sex) as a carrot and then a stick. It is not amazing, it is vile.

Anticompetitive with themselves? It’s not like Claude / Anthropic have any kind of monopoly, and services companies are allowed to charge different rates for different kind of access to said service?

My point was that they are both quite hostile environments for different reasons. In the same way space has abundant power supply, subsea has an abundant heat sink.

Just like you don’t get much water in space.

Or you end up with one of the greatest business models of all time like Google?

I struggle to understand people getting butt hurt about a free service showing its users adverts, that will keep the service free.

They should have done this earlier, so their adds would be better by now, and they have a better chance against Google.

British building regs literally require insulation? It is not a law that old builds have to be brought up to code, but there were government schemes where you got free loft and cavity wall insulation in old houses.

Depends what you expect, people still have problems that need solved by software, if you expect to be the next Google the odds are not in your favor but if you aim to have a sustainable income from software that should be viable.

Their price was too high because it had to include paying back £1B of lease fees that were made as part of another government policy. Comes back to priorities being confusing, if the intention is lower bills why the lease fees, if the purpose is good jobs and independence, why compete on price? If their purpose is national wealth why not partial state funding / ownership?

But at its core, what is the most important?

The cfd auctions are competitive on price, but things like clean industry bonus and supply chain plans expect some local content. You can’t compete on price and also use expensive UK suppliers.

Hi, these projects already have grid connection dates so no new grid upgrades are required to deliver. The developers of the wind farm have to factor in transmission charges (tnuos) into their bids that pay for these.

I guess we are. But who are the plants owned by, who built the and where did the components come from, are we also switching them off because our grid cannot handle transmit huge volumes of renewable energy from Scotland to London, and turning on gas power plants to make up for it.

You also have situations, like today, where a German developer has handed back a seabed lease for 3GW of offshore power because they didn’t get a contract for power from government (CFD) and their lease fees are approx £400m/yr if they want to continue developing the windfarm. This is after spending £1B already on lease fees with nothing to show for it.

Chinas policy around energy works and it has allowed them to become the world’s engine for renewable power. They get the benefit of energy efficiency and being a critical trade partner for every country in the world.

My experience is that the UK (for example) doesn’t really know why it is building offshore wind. Is it to reduce bills to consumers (OFGEMS remit), is it to create local jobs in manufacturing (Clean Industry Bonus Scheme), is it to stimulate national wealth by ownership of projects (British Energy). It’s a mess unclear picture for me.

It would be nice if politicians could spend some time trying to work together, cross parties a come up with some sensible resolutions and long term plans instead of trying to score points for soundbites and clips.

It’s something normal people understand - everyone who uses a desktop/laptop computer will have rearranged an icon. If they read this it will likely trigger some thoughts about what it could do for them.

The actual transactions around this deal will be interesting - will Google simply withold $1B from their search deal, will they pay it then Applepay it back (or a split). I doubt we’ll even know.

For me I think the quality and type of care is different when there’s no profit centre - it’s just people looking after people.