> You become better at expressing your thoughts, but harder to understand.

This happens most though when the speaker doesn't (or care to) understand their audience.

Eg i find effective communication requires expertise in both the subject matter domain but also the reference of the listener. Eg in ELI5 framing, if you don't know what information 5yr olds are expected to know you'll do a poor job at an ELI5.

With that said it often feels like Claude does poorly at both framing the response relative to what it "thinks" the listener knows, but also the prose is... sideways, just weird as you said.

That believes that the world can be simplified into dichotomies, or at least, simplified. Sometimes problems are complex, and the solutions to them necessarily so. For example, cancer. I order to begin to understand that problem, you have to understand the utter complex scheme it has devised in order to exist. A 20 minute YouTube video isn't going to be able to begin to cover the basics of the subject, although there are some good ones, with clever analogies.

Just because something is difficult to understand doesn't mean it's fraud, although if someone is trying to dazzle you with clever words and names of institutions you recognize because they are selling you something, there's a good chance they're lying to you in order to get some money from you.

[dead]

Same. The issue with Anthropics models is that (speaking regarding code generation) they REFUSE any kind of comment override instructions. I've tried everything and no matter what, after a few turns, they resort to generating the same overtly verbose junk. Bun's codebase is littered with them See

   // `HANDLE` is an opaque kernel handle (kernel32 validates and returns 0/FALSE
   // on a non-console handle); every out-param is `&mut T` to a `#[repr(C)]` POD,
   // ABI-identical to the Win32 `LP*` pointer (thin non-null). The reference type
   // encodes the only pointer-validity precondition, so `safe fn` discharges the
   // link-time proof. (`bun_windows_sys::kernel32` declares these with `*mut`;
   // redeclared locally so the legacy-conhost cursor path below is plain calls.)

or

   // Progress's terminal handle is the canonical `output::File` (vtable-backed
   // stderr/File from `OutputSinkVTable`). The duplicate `ProgressTerminalVTable`
   // from B-0 round 1 is removed; tty/ansi/winsize route through    the new
   // `OutputSinkVTable` slots so `bun_core` stays T0 (no `bun_sys` dep).

from src/bun_core/Progress.rs

It's pretty much the biggest complaint of Claude compared to its competitors, so they really should adress it .

[dead]

Thank you. If this whole thing isn't fun, it isn't worth doing.

Absolutely not. Makes about as much sense as judging a car based on how good an airplane it makes.

What if it doesn't like you

can you elaborate?

I take issue with your use of the word "bend" here.

Can you provide specific examples of where Elon has bent the levers of government?

xAI is the most profitable part of SpaceX by far.

> Even with his successes (Tesla, SpaceX) he has built them up in large part by bending levers of government to his advantage.

So what? Thats called being a maverick. He is very very good at executing on making money which is the point of business.

What failed with X? Usage today is higher than ever

> As if "the public" knows literally anything

Ah, yes, democracy!, except for when the public is wrong.

Who decides when the public is wrong? We do! Who decides "what the public voted for"? We do! So we are the rulers? No, of course, not, this is democracy.

You want to become the decider of when the public is wrong and of what the public voted for? TYRANT! TYRANT!

Only sheep believe that was a Nazi salute

Maybe comment on model releases you've got some experience, or insight about.

Seriously. They already get caught uploading everyone’s private credentials once before, one would have to be a particularly gullible rube to trust grok again. Especially with musk in charge.

Cursor never added Astra to its consumer subscription plans. And it's likely exactly because of this announcement. Why would they add support for a model they would have to remove shortly after?

Even if they could do that (workaround to include Astra in CursorBench), that has no practical consequences for Cursor users and that's what I as a Cursor user (what I use for dev, though I use ChatGPT for non-dev stuff) care about.

They can benchmark it because you can use an openai api key with cursor. Astra is just not included in the cursor plan.

They have Astra in other benchmarks lower on the page. They just don't want to show it winning