Actually Claude can teach humans more about humans by providing the language and personality knobs. For casual conversation, have 100 of personality profiles and language styles and upfront tell the user that they are engaging with P profile currently and see how humans relate to it. This will teach humans how to peel back layers of style, fluff, flair from language vs facts.

I stuff what I have to say into AI's it.

That's how Henry David Thoreau wrote.

> deep technical connection to the mental model of what is being built.

/wayfinder: Nothing is too big to plan anymore

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3lL98Pj90o

The /wayfinder Demo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=251hsWgoTPM

Does this actually work for you?

Is Mojo programming language useful in the age of AI?

Analogy: Textual version of Material Design from Google.

Standardization in important information rich environment is good. Standardization for art is not good. We should not mix these two distinct scenarios. Or maybe I am old.

> Analogy: Textual version of Material Design from Google.

What? The post I linked to is talking about the layout and appearance of the page, in addition to a few textual elements.

> Standardization in important information rich environment is good.

Why is this good in general? And specifically, how is standardizing on e.g. a meaningless status indicator (that doesn't really indicate the status of anything) "good"?

Besides, this is not standardization, it's statistical models (LLMs) converging on a design for arbitrary and likely inscrutable reasons, without understanding the meaning or purpose behind design.

"Ask not what your Company can do for you —ask what you can do for your Company". - Anthropic CEO.

I think Threads could have been done in Elixir.

I have escaped the Matrix [bits and bytes world]; But entered the Gastrics (juice) [ie flesh and bones world]

Greatness cannot be planned.