If people live lives wherein they build important societal systems to be biased towards "short fast exciting" lives, the opportunity to live a long, boring, safe one may just evaporate.
It's maybe closer to putting a sign saying "The door is locked" on an unlocked bank vault.
It does nothing to improve security, and if someone manages to get inside and see the sign (i.e. "extract the prompt"), it gives them a strong hint there's interesting stuff behind this door.
It's a network effect thing - if enough people used an OSM client and opted into sharing anonymized location data, you might be able to get somewhere with it.
In practice, I think it'd have the same problem as the core map data - surprisingly good data in places with a lot of adopters, and nothing at all in places without.
That said, though, the traffic data is pretty secondary - a good, open routing engine would be lovely to have, and will slowly become more relevant as the map expand and fills out.
At its best, the OSM data puts Google to _shame_. Super-fine resolution and details, nuances of street layout precisely correct, mountains of meticulously-maintained metadata that makes manifold niche geospatial apps possible.
Alas, in any given area, OSM is only as good as the union of the publicly-provided street data and the obsessiveness of the area's mappers.
Most towns in central PA, for example, have no street address listed for hundreds of buildings.
I've made many small contributions to help, and really enjoy doing so, but someone looking for driving directions needs to be able to whip out their phone and slap in an address / business name and have it Just Work.
You can't reliably count on OSM for that.
I wind up falling back from OsmAnd to Gmaps probably every fifth drive.
> I think our (assuming ur American) is the strongest its ever been and I didn't even vote for the guy.
Um.
What?
As a conservative-leaning registered Republican, I think Trump has brought the US the closest it's been to self-destruction since the Civil War.
His administration has authorized heinous human rights violations repeatedly, and has prevented "law enforcement" agents who killed innocent civilians from being brought to trial multiple times:
The administration has violently pushed away most of its historical allies, and is going to enjoy the privilege of trying to stumble through the world on its own for quite a while.
The economy looks good on paper, but that's almost entirely due to the current genAI bubble, not any intelligent economic choices by the president's office.
Most recently, the utterly idiotic ruination of the reflecting pool in DC, and subsequent insane claims that it was intentionally destroyed by the administration's critics is emblematic of the stupidity and self-destruction inflicted on the nation by President Trump. It's a small thing, compared to many of the issues, but it illustrates the harmful behavioral patterns in a crystal-clear manner:
I had assumed that the recent OpenAI solution to an Erdos problem represented original mathematical thought.
I went looking for more details, and found this Scientific American article which provided some nuance I had previously missed, namely that the mathematicians involved don't think genAI created any really new mathematics - just applied what existed in an intelligent, elegant way:
As a fluent native speaker who has read thousands of books and sometimes reads dictionary entries for fun, a number of these definitions are actually slightly off.
"Verbose," for instance, is defined as "Using more words than are needed."
That's not exactly wrong, but it's kind of misleading. "Verbose" explicitly means using a large pile of words, drowning the reader in far more words than are strictly necessary.
"More words than are needed" could be as limited as "used a three-word construction in a sentence where it could have been one."
There are many more like this.
Please, I beg all of you - don't use LLMs to generate linguistic slop that claims to be linguistic education.
The only way people will get to self-expression that's worth hearing is by working their way through the self-expression that wasn't.
In a better world that would happen in school and as a normal part of growing up, but at least in the US, that mostly doesn't happen.
If humans use LLMs to write, it's much more likely they will never uncover the unique perspectives they could share with the world.
So, for those whose parents and teachers failed them, embracing, encouraging, and engaging their clumsy, self-centered rudeness is, I think, the best path forward.
Granted, when it is clumsy, self-centered, and rude, one of the more helpful things we can do is offer the critiques that clearly and coherently point that out, as you've done here.
...though I stand by my claim that using LLMs to write is actually deeply offensive and rude, a rejection of what it means to be human, and that it should be met with strong rejections.
Alas, for rude, tasteless behavior, such as replacing your own authentic self-expression with the mellifluous spew of verbal diarrhea that bullshit machines slather across all surfaces they touch, rude, tasteless metaphors are the only fitting ones.
What's not okay is a world where unreliable tools can destroy people's lives based on entirely false information, and the purveyors of those tools and false claims get away scot-free afterwards.
> If this ruling forces companies to put more money into #3, whereas now they're coasting on good enough, I'd say it was speeding up innovation.
The thing is, no one has the slightest idea how to stop hallucinations.
The models are fundamentally "hallucinatory" at core - they generate what is _probable to follow the string thus far in its training corpus_, modulo RLHF and friends.
Notice that nothing there has any rigorous relationship to truth.
Sure, the companies could start pumping money into pure research on what models other than transformers might yield something that can reason rigorously, but at that point you're talking about finding a way to throw out LLMs entirely in favor of a less-pathologically-broken model, like Gary Marcus keeps complaining people should be doing.
I could not agree more that Claude itself is a janky, hacky, crappy piece of software.
When management at $DAYJOB brought the hammer down and said, "Everyone has to use genAI all the time, OR ELSE," I expected to be blown away by the tool I was avoiding due to ethical concerns, aesthetic objections, humanism, and long-term thinking.
I was born away, but not in a good way.
The CLI is _bad_. I've seen it randomly fail to render anything at all on the terminal multiple times. It has a vim-mode, but it's painfully buggy, and I can literally outrun it - if I try to type too quickly after hitting Esc for normal mode, it just doesn't return to normal mode. It's I was keeping track of the bugs in the Claude TUI, but gave up because it was taking _too much of my time_ to do so.
If nothing else, I'd say Claude shows convincingly that success is not the default for vibecoding.
Yes, it technically does the job, and no, I don't think I've ever used a worse TUI.
I've considered keyboard-driven WMs before, but have thus far gotten by using regular WMs with a few custom keybinds for window sizing, movement, and monitor placement.
As long as you have an automated algorithm for the basic layout, it works pretty well.
I still have to contendb with apps that don't offer the shortcuts I want, though, and that's when Shortcat is very handy.
As one who's driving Claude daily due to corporate mandates, I can see why people fall in love with genAI coding, but my revulsion has only grown as I've learned to do it, so I won't be spending my free time with LLMs.
I care for my wife.
I father my children.
I write software.
I play music.
[email protected]
http://www.nateeag.com