I think the idea behind that concept is not that it's true. The idea is we will never change human self-interest and greed. So we build systems where even with that as the primary motivation, it still has more important secondary effects that probably benefit us.

And I'm saying that that hasn't historically been the case.

There are plenty of quarries that effectively condemned land that destroyed entire ecosystems because of greedy mineral companies. Pretty much anyone using this forum is using a product that was produced by unethical and/or child labor. We're already seeing negative effects from climate change, effecting many, many people, mostly in poor countries, and it's likely to get worse before it gets better.

You could argue that these systems benefit some people; I certainly benefit from having cheap electronics, but of course you can always cherry pick good examples from pretty much anything. This is with the current system that we built.

Now sure, there might be some hypothetical system that maybe fixes these problems, but due to the use of the word "evidence" in the comment I was responding to I didn't think we were talking political theory.

> A big reason I have heard for lack of nuclear build out is the lack of starting capital but after they are built they are generally stable and maintenance is predictable.

I have also heard this, but given Meta's announcement is mostly in funding and extending the useful lifespan, doesn't that indicate without an infusion of capital, the ongoing operations are not cost effective?

It shows that strategic investment matters and people are looking at more than a single cost metric. Nuclear is behind today, but that doesn't hold a promise it will remain true into the future unless you stop investing now.

One armed bandit says explore as well as exploit. This delta you cited indicates the pendulum currently is more exploit than explore, but its not a static equation.

I feel it has to be something bigger, if they’re just taking client side input for the system prompt seems like a security issue. Doesn’t this mean I could reprogram Claude at its core?

You can change the system prompt claude code sends, which changes how the agent frames behavior, but claude still has internal and server side safety layers. So removing or rewriting the client system prompt won't allow to magically bypass those. I think of the client system prompt more as agent configuration than as the primary safety net — it shapes behavior, but it’s not the final authority. I’m covering this in Part 2 — breaking down what’s actually in the system prompt and how the client-side safety framing is constructed.

If they have all of this stuff server side, why are they recreating it client side? That's the part I can't figure out.

My guess is the subscription plans provide a way of controlling the base load better, because of how the "session duration" and token quota per session and week work. People can get tremendous value, but a lot of that value is only available at night (theoretically when their GPUs are most likely to have less contention). So it's kind of a pricing strategy around their excess capacity. (For comparison, when first announced, AWS spot instances were like 10x cheaper than reserved.)

Survival of the fittest is "that which reproduces more successfully, continues". In biology, this is genetics. In ideas, it's memetics. I suppose this means that our most powerful ideas from the internet generation are Rickroll, Doge, and Grumpy Cat.

Haven’t all the large conflicts in the past 40 years been started by one party? Iraq, Afghanistan, Iraq 1, all the stuff in South America in the 80s…

I think that was their point.

What is the impact of misleading embeddings, how do they compose? I honestly am interested but don't know enough to understand what you're saying.

Why would I want to explore the embedding space myself, isn't this a tool where I can run cross-data exploratory analyses against unstructured data, where it's pre-populated with content?

Would you share an overview of how it works? Sounds interesting

Perhaps I can release it as a standalone github skill, and then do a blog post on it or something.

I'm just also working on real projects as well, so a lot of my priority is focused on new skills building, and not worrying about managing the current ones I have as github repos.

That would probably be a lot of work for little gain. Would you be open to asking Claude to summarize your approach and just put it into a paste? I'm less interested in specific implementations and more about approaches, what the tradeoffs are and where it best applies.

Adult diagnosis last year for me, bring gentle with myself for past mistakes is part of my plan. I’m also trying adderall under medical supervision, so I can strengthen the habits and systems with a little extra help.