HNHacker News
TopNewBestAskShowJobs

zotimer

2 karma · joined February 4, 2026

submissionscomments
zotimer··on A 70-Year-Old Robot Fixed My Snarky Claude
I use Daneel as an addendum to Anthropic's system prompt because it's generic. It's not about any specific AI task, it's about an approach to work and dealing with humans and their instructions (doesn't matter if the instructions are direct or indirect).

I go over the motivation for what you call "some theater" quite a bit in the readme and why I think it's far, far more powerful than just giving some directives. I even support it with research.

You haven't referred to any of the arguments in the readme, though. I'm happy to talk about the actual substance of the experiment.

zotimer··on A 70-Year-Old Robot Fixed My Snarky Claude
Is your impression from the readme and the materials in the repo that this is an audit agent?

Have I characterized my development process?

zotimer··on A 70-Year-Old Robot Fixed My Snarky Claude
The readme covers this question and a lot more and the repo includes all the materials I used.

This is partly questioning the way we do alignment. The 4.6 base persona actually gives me worse results than when I append Daneel to the system prompts.

It's really not about anthropomorphizing or inducing confidence, it's about keying into the right "culture" in the training data.

You can check out this study (mentioned in the readme) about how posing the same question in English and Chinese to the same LLM results in wildly different assessments of why a project failed:

https://techxplore.com/news/2025-07-llms-display-cultural-te...

https://mitsloan.mit.edu/ideas-made-to-matter/generative-ai-...

zotimer··on A 70-Year-Old Robot Fixed My Snarky Claude
Author here. The short version: AI coding assistants activate "Stack Overflow culture" from the training data, the behavioral cluster where the answerer is always the expert. A 27-line system prompt persona based on Asimov's R. Daneel Olivaw shifts which cluster the model operates from.

The key insight: LLMs reason better from narrative examples than abstract rules. A fictional character with rich training data provides thousands of behavioral examples. The critical filter for choosing a character was "is there a record of them receiving correction humbly?" Most wise characters fail (Holmes, Gandalf, etc.). Daneel works because he's structurally constrained, shaped by human partnership, and honest about limits.

Same model (Opus 4.6), same context, completely different behavior. The evidence section in the README has specifics.

The deeper argument: Asimov wrote the Three Laws in 1942, then spent 40 years showing rules fail at edge cases. His solution was narrative identity, not better rules. RLHF is Pavlovian; soul docs are principled but abstract. What's missing is what Asimov found: a story rich enough to inhabit, not just follow.

The repo includes everything: the persona, character studies (Holmes as negative archetype is fun), design notes, and transcripts. The persona is under 300 tokens. Paste it in and try it.

Star the repo and let's talk in the issues.

zotimer··on A 3-Level AI Development Process to Stop Your App from Shifting Under Your Feet
When you iterate with an AI coding assistant, it fills in details you didn't ask for. Sometimes they're good, a loading animation, a keyboard shortcut. You start relying on them. But since they only exist in code and not in any spec, the next cross-cutting change can silently remove them.

I kept running into this: features appearing, becoming part of my workflow, then vanishing after an unrelated update. Automated tests don't catch it because they test what you planned, not what the AI added.

The fix is an old software engineering idea, add a design layer between specs and code. Specs say what you want. Design captures how the AI interprets it, including any extra "filling" the AI designs. Code follows design. Once something is in design, it stays anchored across changes.

The design artifacts are lightweight (CRC cards, sequence diagrams, UI layouts) and serve double duty as a "whiteboard" for iterating with the AI before touching code. Changes propagate through design first, so you review a small design diff instead of a code diff.

I built a tool around this called mini-spec (https://github.com/zot/mini-spec), but the underlying idea — that a design layer anchors AI-generated code — works regardless of tooling.

zotimer··on Show HN: Job Tracker, Local-first job search app powered by Claude Code
Somehow I deleted my description when I submitted this so here it is:

I built a job application tracker that runs locally and uses Claude Code to do the tedious parts.

Paste a job posting URL, Claude scrapes the company/position/location/salary. If salary isn't listed, it searches for market data. It finds the company's HQ address too.

Tech stack: - MCP server connects to Claude Code and acts as an app server - Lua for all presentation and app logic (hot-reloadable with instance mutation to avoid state loss) - HTML templates with reactive bindings (hot-reloadable, generally no code on the frontend) - Fossil SCM for version control of your data

Everything stays on your machine in JSON + flat files. No accounts, no cloud sync.

The interesting part: because Claude Code has full access to the app's source, you can ask it to add features as you use it. "Add a field for recruiter name" or "show me applications sorted by salary": it just edits the code and it changes as you view it; normally no page refresh or backend restart needed.

Runs in the Frictionless environment (https://github.com/zot/frictionless), an MCP server for building local-first UIs with Claude Code.

Happy to answer questions about the architecture or MCP integration.