Is adding JPEG compression to your software “intentional degradation” of the software? I wouldn't say providing a selectable option to use a faster, cheaper version of something qualifies as “degradation”.
It is certainly true that they did a poor job communicating this change to users (I did not know that the default was “high” before they introduced it, I assumed they had added an effort level both above and below whatever the only effort choice was there before). On the other hand, I was using Claude Code a fair bit on “medium” during that time period and it seemed to be performing just fine for me (and saving usage/time over “high”), so it doesn't seem clear that that was the wrong default, if only it had been explained better.
Is default enabling JPEG compression to your software's output because the compression saves you money “intentional degradation” of the software?
I would say it does, and I'd loathe to use anything made by people who'd couch that change to defaults as "providing a selectable option to use a faster, cheaper version".
yes. if instagram started performing intensive JPEG compression that made photos choppy and unpleasant, I would consider that an intentional degredation of the software.
As I understand Anthropic's recent retrospective, calling the models directly via API did not change; the problem was that the harness changed and this was not communicated well to users.
Metaphorical reasoning is lossy, so talking about lossy image compression seems to be ironically fitting! ... perhaps a (hypothetical) metaphor involves Photoshop changing their default JPEG compression level without making it clear to users. PS did not change the JPEG algorithm, only a setting for it. If you look closely, you would notice it: I'll come back to this point in the last paragraph.
But a part of metaphor breaks down if you accept that Anthropic was making a net positive trade-off for customers so that they could provide a better overall service level statistically to their entire user base.
A rough metaphor for the individual versus collective trade-off might be when a retail store caps the number of toilet paper rolls customer can buy at a time. The goal is to reduce hoarding, which in a way is an analogous to Claude users having usage patterns at the high end of the statistical tail.
When it comes to PR*, transparency almost always wins? Anthropic's mistake hid the change from users, but they're going to notice when overall performance is degraded. I would hazard a guess that Claude has endured more verbal assault in the last month than in its entire history.
Is this comment in the wrong place? The article is literally about how the medical establishment gives good advice on acetaminophen and ibuprofen, but it's not getting through to people.
He gets there after exposing a bunch of "research" he did himself and after admitting he was using ibuprofen for a long time because he "thought" it was safer.
Even if you're working on one single thread of development, jj is easier and more flexible than git though. That it works better for super complicated workflows is just a bonus.
My favorite Apple example of this is that when the Apple Watch notices that you're walking/running/biking and asks if you want to start a workout, for some reason you cannot accept it with the double-tap-your-fingers gesture. Which is fine if it's warm outside...but when it's winter in Minnesota, if I want to activate it I have to take one of my gloves off, pull up my sleeves, and put the gloves back on, while bitching about how nobody designing the watch lives in a cold climate. (Especially when I'm on a bike. Riding no-hands in the snow is not a smart idea.)
I still buy e-books for nonfiction I expect I'll read once, take a few notes on, and then probably never come back to, if I can't easily get them at the library. No need to clutter up my already overflowing bookshelves. For anything else I'm with you – not only do you not have DRM or other bullshit, physical books are still easier to navigate and overall more usable.
(This is absolutely bonkers though – the experience of using an e-reader has basically not gotten better since 2008 when I got my first Kindle. There are still glaringly obvious usability issues which nobody has spent any time innovating on.)
Very frequently when I turn on my Kindle it starts on “Home”. I have never found anything on “Home” remotely useful, and just want to see the books that I already have on the device, but they keep pushing me over to the screen full of ads (and it often takes >5 seconds to switch screens after I tap on “Library” for some reason). I think that's what they're talking about.
Car ownership is not a good proxy for how important cars are to living well in a particular place, when the places you're comparing have completely different design philosophies. If you look at how many trips the average Dutch car owner takes by car vs. how many trips the average American car owner takes by car, I guarantee you there will be a much larger difference.
I'm also not sure that anyone was claiming automobile technology itself was bad, just that in many places at many times it has been used in suboptimal and harmful ways.
I definitely agree that merely having automobiles doesn't require adopting characteristically American urban design philosophy, and that this philosophy isn't very compatible with dense walkable urbanism. But I don't see how to interpret
> The upsides of automobiles generally all exist outside of the 'personal automobile', i.e. logistics. These upsides and downsides don't need to coexist. We could reap the benefits without needing to suffer for it, but here we are.
other than as a claim we should not have personal automobiles.
This reminds me of the sailor who [decided](https://darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin1999-50.html) to measure his internal resistance by pushing probes through the skin on his thumbs and electrocuted himself with the 9V multimeter battery.
Mythbusters time. Salty fluids can be remarkably conductive. Blood qualifies. What's interesting though is that you have to wonder if there isn't some contributing factor here, as a kid I did this quite a few times, so that's one more for that list of stuff that could have killed me. At the same time: I didn't have nice insulation piercing tips back then (I do now) and that may be what saved me. I will definitely not try this again.
Another story in the same line is that I heard that a horse got killed by contact with a lantern battery, but I don't have any reference for that, just a story by a family member that collected coaches.
Yeah, but there's a big difference between having a car because you can afford it and it's often more convenient, and it being completely impractical to not have one. Or even to go have a beer without having to drive home.
reply