ozozozd

You clearly didn’t read the github issue where they clearly state Claude Code adds the email to the User-Agent, without the user’s consent.

Cows have agency. If your cows get out on the road and hit someone’s car, or hurt a child, do you get to disclaim responsibility? Should you?

Also, the github issue admits that they put the user’s email in the context.

Hugged to death.

Of course they did. What a load of bs.

How did the model get access to the email? The harness gave it to the model.

They may have vibecoded it. No one put a gun to their head though. Still their responsibility.

If they are forced to use Claude at work, that’s a different story.

But if they are paying Anthropic to be subjected to this treatment, they should work on self-respect.

I canceled my ChatGPT sub for a bit and used Claude instead, when Altman first sided with Trump.

But then I realized self-righteous, self-appointed morality police scares me more than opportunistic capitalist. Well, they also leaked their code. Who leaks their code?

Is Claude Code what Outlook/MSN was already?

I have trouble taking people seriously when I see them using Claude Code. Unless they are non-technical.

It’s embarrassing to be in tech right now.

Sober people making drunk decisions with a great sense of self-importance and seriousness, delivering outcomes as unserious as it gets.

I think you would’ve really enjoyed the Requiem for a Dream website.

I suppose I was attacking the premise “disease or disposition?”

It doesn’t matter. And she was in the vicinity of this for a bit.

The moral accounting is a factor of the anger though. The moral system defines the lack of balance in accounting as unjust and those with unbalanced accounts as undeserving. And thus the anger that comes from having to take care of someone who is undeserving.

Whereas “she is my mother” reasoning without the deeper questioning would leave her happier.

Even at a glance it gave me confidence that the UX will be far superior than Uber Eats and DoorDash.

Such amazing writing. Vulnerable, raw, and sincere.

I am sad, but not just for the mother, also for the daughters. And not just because they longed for their mother’s love that never arrived, but they found themselves in this artificial moral system that forces them to account for who deserves what, and justifies the anger they now have to live with. As if the anger is a gain, rather than a burden.

Not sure if this is a coping mechanism, and even if it is, it appears to be a maladaptive one, but this moral accounting, the idea of one deserving and the other one not deserving, with an arbitrary starting point is pure delusion, and not even a helpful one.

People were forced from their home - a home their ancestors likely stole from someone else, going back ad infinitum - yet this made them the person they are. Or they were the one who stole it, and their descendants believe they deserved it. They might even say “they worked hard for it.”

It would be consistent if this was in a moral system where forceful taking wasn’t considered immoral. But it’s not. It was moral when my ancestors stole, but immoral if you want what I inherited. Such cognitive dissonance, motivated by, not really a desire to survive most of the time, but to experience luxury. Even if you were to win, it seems misguided and a waste of a life as far as we know we all get one chance to live right or well - whichever you’d consider not wasted.

My grandfather owned a sizable amount of land at a time when land was the primary means of production. Sizable is relative, but I’ve seen those who worked on the land, without owning any of it. They seem to have been grateful and happy, and the next generation appears to be thankful to my dad’s family. Does that change the fact that my grandfather or his ancestors obviously didn’t create that land out of thin air with amazing work ethic? They took it from someone. And I benefitted from it enormously.

Who deserves what, and who worked hard… nonsensical talk.

We should all believe that working hard will yield a better life for us. I believe believing that is important. But thinking that it’s real and allowing it to shape our morality seems outright immoral.

I wish her peace. And hope she discovers it’s a much better live with forgiveness and generosity, and no regard for who deserves what. It was thieves and thievery all along, and it still is.

I should reread Tao of Pooh.

> Another key point is that H-1B employees rarely change jobs, since their visa is tied to a specific employer.

That statement is fake news. And not sure why they have to lie if all this data already backs up their claim. Oh wait, if it wasn’t for this BS claim we would question the market forces and not buy their BS…

I changed my job 3 times in 2 years on an H1B. Standard paperwork. In fact, the last one was during the company I worked for was being acquired so I had 2 petitions at the same time. Didn’t lift a finger for it. Well, other than signing the papers sent over to me.

I can get behind the claim that H1B workers negotiate worse because they are new to the country and possibly unaware of the market forces etc. And they don’t have the unemployment benefits to fall back to - even though they pay for it the same as everyone.

Oh, they also pay Social Security. And then leave. Just so we can enjoy it.

This fake news won’t die.

I was making over market rate on H1B. The petition process forces the employer to pay market rate or above.

Also the transfer petition is very easy and it usually takes 2-4 weeks. You can argue that changing jobs is higher friction for H1B workers, but if you are offered more salary elsewhere but decide to stay, well, that’s kind of on you, not the H1B process.

My native language has no gender. Every time I see these conversations I wonder “why not do away with the gender?”

It often leaks information the speaker didn’t intend to share. e.g., “I met a friend. She was late.”

Did the speaker mean or care to share to gender of this friend? Is it relevant? I don’t think so.

And I find it especially interesting when people argue for gender-neutral plurals, but then happily use gendered noun. It sort of feels like “everyone must stay in their lane” type of expectation.

Even the patriarchy argument is weird. The patriarchy - along with religion - wanted this gender line and specification in every context. Wanna stick it to patriarchy? Nix the gender from all languages!

Tell what this does like you are telling w friend who trusts what you say, without the layers and layers of slop that aims to establish trust.

Please.

You are right that they didn’t invent it. It’s a pretty well-established method for cornering a market.

1. All those who have been arguing this - many of them non-technical - are part of the same ideological movement.

2. Technically, there isn’t. In practice, majority of the time regulations benefitted those who wrote them.

3. Not sure if this is a criticism of the comment you are replying to or of the p-doom crowd. We would all appreciate facts stated instead of science fiction tropes repeated.

Look, “a lot of people say this” is a Trumpian fallacy. A lot of people say a lot of crazy things. It says nothing about the factuality about what they say. How many are this lot? Who are they? What do they know? Why are they incapable of expressing it without so much emotion? How come a big portion are non-technical?

This is a much better title.

I can kind of relate but I feel like I am mourning something different: the loss of the desire to seek truth in tech, math etc.

Nothing is validated or tested anymore. It’s all about the shape or believability or even how loud it is.

They dropped 100+ papers no one read. I am sure mathematicians are reading them now but even this forum has concluded that these problems are solved, without reading or validating.

It’s like everyone forgot “don’t believe everything you read on the Internet.” And it makes for a very boring discussion when everyone is just spewing unvalidated claims, layering them with strong beliefs founded on similarly unvalidated claims. It’s dull, without substance and just pure noise.

Well, you are lucky that you can get them to order tests. That takes serious amount of convincing in the Bay Area.

Not being able to breathe properly increases cardiovascular risk in later years. I am supposed to take care of that deviated septum as well. But Flixonase or generic fluticasone propionate also helps quite a bit when taken weeks/months at a time.

So as long as they have at least one person who hasn’t exhibited bad behavior, the entire org is off the hook.

You sure sound very objective. /s

I doubt that he needed a VISA. Check his profile, and how connected he is through his dad.

I wouldn’t admit to using LLMs to identify an ESP32.

“We used our models to understand the material wrapped around the device. It’s a type of paper commonly found in toilets.”

What’s the Spotify car thing jailbreak? The Spotify carplay UX is so abysmal that it needs a jailbreak and custom UI to be usable.

How is that 1/4th the cost of the regular development? Did your pre-AI code ever hit 50 reviews? If not, it’s impossible that it was slower. If you are talking about agent reviews, it’s not expensive.

Which is it?

We all have beliefs. Some more self-important than others.

Do you think their beliefs deserve some sort of special treatment?

Solid explanation. A+.

That’s EA entering the chat, arguing that all currently available ways of helping are ineffective and until there is an effective way to help is found, they are absolved from helping.

And since they are one day planning to help, they must maximize wealth in the interim. Obviously this wealth maximization can take unorthodox paths because ends justify the means.

It’s very distinctly anti-EA, as in EA is known to advise not to do these things, because it’s not the most “effective” altruism.

And people don’t like them for that exactly, quite deservedly.

Thrift stores? Really?

Super cool!

I wish the controls were a little easier on mobile.