It's not about the author trying to "win an argument against AI".
It's about AI turning the discussion into an argument and being compative, and it's especially about the AI doing that in later versions more so that slightly earlier models.
He should not have the kind of relationship with an AI that would enable discussions to turn into arguments. I'm not above anthropomorphizing Claude, I accept that it's my hard working little buddy. But if he finds himself having any sort of strong emotions about what Claude believes the best continuation of a conversation is, that's a warning flag he should be concerned about.
>He should not have the kind of relationship with an AI that would enable discussions to turn into arguments.
There doesn't need to be any kind of special "relationship with AI", parasocial or whatever for discussions to turn into arguments. Regular use can turn into that just fine, and this is also what they describe.
Imaging something:
P: I want to figure out the best mortgage terms given these parameters (...).
C: Honestly, renting would be a better financial choice than buying.
P: That's not what I asked. I'm not asking whether I should rent or buy—I'm asking about mortgage options.
C: But you asked for the best option. If renting is better than buying under these circumstances, then a mortgage isn't the best option.
> P: I want to figure out the best mortgage terms given these parameters (...).
> C: Honestly, renting would be a better financial choice than buying.
> P: That's not what I asked. I'm not asking whether I should rent or buy—I'm asking about mortgage options.
> C: But you asked for the best option. If renting is better than buying under these circumstances, then a mortgage isn't the best option.
Thos rather sounds like the AI is gaslighting the user: the user asked for the best option on mortgage terms (given these parameters (...)). He never asked for the globally best option (which might also include non-mortgage options).
Hardly any difference. If you haven't seen it before, try an Android phone in your hand and toggle animations 1x/0x and see what a stark difference it is. iOS is still littered with animations all over the place with that toggle enabled.
> They like their cute ASCII/unicode animations, don't they?
One of the few global Cluade directives I have setup is to never use emojis - and it never has, either in chat output or in code. Don't blame the tool when you don't spend 30 seconds configuring it. It's even easier with AI since you don't have to go digging for some obscure .vimrc snippet - it's literally just plain English.
Yeah, I know a lot of indie artists. Most of that vinyl is produced straight off the 44.1/16 digital master. If you think it's analog (or in many cases even properly mastered at all), you're fooling yourself.
The "loudness war" issue is not inherent to digital sources. Nor is it something you need to "master the record out of". It's sufficient to not break it in the first place.
I know this goes against the HN groupthink, but a lot of those accidents are not the car or the drivers fault. I live in a small college town. We have huge problems with students just walking right off the curb, especially when drunk.
The pedestrian is not the one driving the weapon. It is your fault if you hit a pedestrian, even if they walk right off the curb, even if they’re drunk.
Unless they intentionally jump in front of your car in an attempt to commit suicide, it is always on you to ensure you can stop and respond to an emergency, and a pedestrian is such a thing, imho.
I think this is more a design problem with US road infrastructure. City streets are much wider than in other countries which encourages drivers to drive more quickly and allows them to pay less attention. We'd have far fewer pedestrian and cyclist fatalities if we didn't require streets to be so wide.
No, if the pedestrian walks out in the known-dangerour street without so much as a glance, not a crosswalk, that is categorically not the cars fault. Idiots are gonna idiots. Just like all the cyclists that get hit around here for not obeying stop signs.
ALL users of the road are responsible for following the rules. Not being in a car isn't a "I can do whatever I want, whenever I want, whyever I want" pass.
When someone steps out 10ft in front of a car doing 30mph all the attentiveness and safety devices in the world won't make a difference. It's simple physics.
Not animated, but it's fully zoomable (with variable LOD at different levels), searchable (with fuzzy matching), info popups on not just stations, but things like track speed limits, and tunnels. What I do that's really different is that I'm VERY heavily manipulating the underlying data (The pre-processing pipeline is currently at something like 12k lines of python and counting, most of it doing things like advanced network topology, so that we show the actual track layouts, which if drawn at truly geographically accurate scale would just collapse to a single line.
I'm showing tons of detail..... 3.5k+ stations, and every single track - not just the main running lines, but every siding and yard track.
This is the result of probably a few hundred round trips. The really interesting part of the problem is keeping it both relatively true to real geometry, while greatly exaggerating it horizontally so you can actually see the individual running lines/sidings, like a signaling schematic.
I love computational mapping projects, because there is this hard problem of which towns to show on the map.
Your Scotland map shows towns without rail (although some had rail previously, like Callander, Aberfeldy), it prefers insignificant (population-wise) places while ignoring the larger cities next to it (Scone instead of Perth, Bannockburn instead of Stirling, Inverness is missing, Dundee is missing, Aberdeen is missing). All these places are drawn on the map, but not labelled.
All this clearly shows to me how bad it is. Yes it makes it look pretty, but given your task, I would have expected to give you meaningful map labelling.
Something basic like this would get you a long way:
0. cluster population centers into commonly known cities (i.e. show London instead of Islington or Walhamstrow)
1. display names of the top 10 population centers in the UK
2. display towns with stations (if crowded prioritize termination points and junctions, and prioritize larger places over smaller places)
Having said that, its pretty cool to see the new and old network when zoomed in (assuming that it is half-way correct)
Point taken, andf I was actually already doing a fair bit of that, but there was a bug where town names identical to a station name were getting culled. Fixed and uploaded. Also have the data for a few other countries crunching away.
Prior to 1948 when they were all nationalized into British Rail, there were various railroad companies operating across the country. One of these was the Southern Railway, which, well, operated in the South. They started electrifying very aggressively in the mid 1920's. At the time most of what little electrification there was was in London on the Underground.
Compared to AC, 3rd Rail DC is cheaper to install, especially as a retrofit (Overhead wires require bigger tunnels, and increased spacing around tracks for the masts). Downside is that it's not really great for speeds above about 60-70mph, as well as being a bit of a pedestrian hazard. (Ever the one about not peeing on the rails so you don't get shocked? That's 3rd rail DC.)
For the Southern, with it's mostly short routes with many stops, electricfiation was a pretty obvious win, and doing 3rd rail made sense because they could do it quickly and cheaply.
In contrast, the northern routes were electrified muuuch later, after steam had gone away. The main East Coast Mainline from London up to Newscastle and on to Edinburgh wasn't fully electrified until 1991. By the '60s and '70s, with train speeds increasing to 80mph and up, overhead AC was the clear winner.
If you look closely there are a few exceptions - the Merseyrail network in Liverpool is DC. Built 1970s, but using some existing underwater tunnels, and slow speed commuter. Then running ESE from London you have the high speed AC lines leading to the Channel tunnel. Well spotted, the trend generally is quite distinct.
No, it isn't easy to change at all. Not unless the car was specifically designed for it, and not nearly that much of a jump. The ones that exist in real life are almost all for switching between Russian (5ft) and Standard (4ft 8.5in) gauges.
To be eligible to run as part of an Amtrak train any car must past all FRA rules/guidelines, which a Euro-spec car absolutely will not without hundreds of thousands of dollars of work.
It would be MUCH cheaper to start with a car already in the US and meeting those standards. Much, much cheaper. Still not cheap, but in the realm of the practical.
reply