Yes Gruber's comment about not making Ternus debut with a shit sandwich was right on the money, so I wondered why that alone didn't sway him to think that Apple would do the price increase sooner.
How do you avoid interruptions for permission? dangerously skip permissions, or is there something less nuclear than that? For me I guess the only less nuclear thing I can think of is running on a sacrificial machine. Is there any better way?
It's literally just writing a spec.md and reviewing it in a loop, fanning out to many agents using "reviewer -> [findings] -> validator (adversarial) -> judge (on conflict)" passes. Before I had it collect a kernel facts document from sources and a bunch of other stuff using the same kind of loop. It's got all it needs. No crazy permissions needed.
Also I'm doing this because I find it amusing and somewhat educational on a meta level. If I'd written this myself without a spec it would've been done last month and been likely more correct than what Claude is likely to do once it gets to implementing it (the first spec-free attempt failed miserably). This is way too complex an integration for the poor thing. I had some hopes Fable would get it unstuck, but now we'll never know. Fable did seem to be better at keeping it together.
Fun thing to watch on a second monitor though.
To answer your question, there is something less nuclear: You can cycle multiple modes with SHIFT+TAB.
I'm not charging by hour, but per project. I have a marketing site, but I'm not getting new clients through my website. All of the new projects are through cold calling.
So you do two websites over the course of a week. You must do cold calling and outreach to maintain that momentum. You are not making $1k/hr. You have a ~$50/hr side hustle before you've paid your ±35-45% taxes.
Vector search was around at least since Damashek in 1995, a solid five years prior to fine article’s timeline. And the references in that paper reach back even farther. The supposed evolution was way earlier than what is related in the article.
It’s not just the one detail. They also racialized the discussion of the impact and, egads, a cardinal sin, they mentioned the “Gulf of Mexico” and made their mention of the governor’s decision a partisan jab by not including the “one detail.”
The white supremacists, descendants of the defeated confederacy, and their sympathizers would love for everyone to stop “racializing” issues.
I guess they don’t want to talk about how black people didn’t even get protection against housing discrimination until the current president of the United States was already a teenager.
This is why the impact is “racialized:” because non-white races often live in less desirable geographic regions of metropolitan areas.
Look at a lot of American cities and demographics of people that live near flood plains and other hazards like pollution and noise and you’ll often notice racial patterns. These are objectively real, not “racialized.”
The people who want us to stop talking about it like yourself, intentionally or not, want us all to bury our head in the sand and pretend like the discrimination has been resolved despite the fact that non-white races are still feeling these impacts.
If you’d like to expand your mind on a related subject, this is a great story:
If you have any friends or contacts or family who have ever shared any private information with you of any kind (phone number, address, photo, private opinions, etc.) you damn well have something to hide.
That was a callback to "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." Even if that didn’t land, I think it's clear from the rest of the context that I don't intend to provide my passcode.
reply