I think it’s a bit like a gambling addiction. I’m riding high the few times it pays off, but most of the time it feels like it’s just on the edge of paying off (working) and surely the next prompt will push it over the edge.
I feel this exactly. I’ve been one of the biggest champions of the tech in my org in spite of the frequent pain I feel from it.
just.. uninstall it? i've removed all ai tooling from both personal+work devices and highly recommend it. there's no temptation to 'quickly pull up $app just to see' if it doesn't exist
It does _feel_ like the value and happiness will come some versions down the road when I can actually focus on orchestration, and not just bang my head on the table. That’s the main thing that keeps me from just removing it all in personal projects.
I do this a lot and it’s super helpful.
The OP is right and I feel this a lot: when Claude pulls me into a rabbit hole, convinces me it knows where to go, and then just constantly falls flat on its face and we waste like several hours together, with a lot of all caps prompts from me towards the end. These sessions last in a way that he mentions: "maybe its just a prompt away from working"
But I would never delete CC because there are plenty of other instances where it works excellent and accelerates things quite a lot. And additionally, I know we see a lot of "coding agents are getting worse!" and "METR study proves all you AI sycophants are deluding yourselves!" and I again understand where these come from, agree with some of the points they raise, but honestly: my own personal perception (which I argue is pretty well backed up by benchmarks and by Claude's own product data which we don't see -- I doubt they would roll out a launch without at least one or more A/B tests) is that coding agents are getting much better, and that as a verifiable domain these "we're running out of data!" problems just aren't relevant here. The same way alphago gets superhuman, so will these coding agents, it's just a matter of when, and I use them today because they are already useful to me.
I am also now experimenting with my own version of opencode and I change models a lot, and it helps me learn how each model fails at different tasks, and it also helps me figure out the most cost effective model for each task. I may have spent too much time on this.
https://pivot-to-ai.com/2025/06/05/generative-ai-runs-on-gam...
There certainly is some user preference, but the deal breakers are flat out shortcomings that other tools solved (in AI terms) long ago. I haven’t dealt with agent loops since March with any other tool.
Especially for software developer and tech influencer focused markets.
Take that how you will.
This is in a $3.6 Trillion company, for a product they're spending billions a quarter to develop, with specialized employees making mid 6-figure to 7-figure salaries and bonuses... you'd think somebody has the right connections into the departments that typically handle the payment systems.
My expectations shoot up dramatically for organizations that have all the funding they need to create something "insanely great" in terms of user experience the further they fall short... I don't know who the head of this group/project/department/product is... but someone failed at their job, and got payed excessively for this poor execution.
That’s a big assertion that needs evidence. I’m strongly in favor of legalization but not deregulation. It was a pretty big loophole that allowed what’s essentially weed to sidestep the regulation their competitors faced - and there wasn’t great consumer awareness about the differences even though there were safety implications: https://drexel.edu/cannabis-research/research/research-highl...
This law seems pretty well targeted in its scope, bringing the 2018 law back to what was intended (easy legal CBD/hemp, as long as there aren’t other things in there).
There was absolutely no federal regulatory framework for marijuana. none. It's just plain illegal. Unless you can get one of a handful of research licenses, which is almost totally irrelevant.
Hemp had some, fairly weak regulation. And theoretically, testing requirements, although they were deferred and deferred to the point they were basically done only privately with the idea the DEA would eventually get involved.
Instead they're just dumped now into the marijuana bucket which has no federal regulation at all, or alternatively, at the state level the states could always define their regulatory framework to be agnostic to THC content of cannabis.
So this does the exact opposite of what you had hoped.
It's just old-school think of the kids and not in my territory. We don't know how to regulate and handle this because our politicians and more and more our citizens don't understand what is being voted on or has been happening in their own states for 7 years.
Have you used these products? It's a shame, the quality that I was getting just within the past 3 months was incredible and it is market not afraid to try new stuff.
I'm sad, flower from OR, NC, OK, IN, and others will never legally hit my lungs. Back to the cartels? Or perhaps I should overpay by $200 with the comfort of having 0 clue where it comes from, again?
You have the power to elect people that will actually represent you.
Your ignorance shows in spades. The arbitrary ban on THC and its analogues prevent chronic pain patients like me (a criminally underserved market) from becoming addicted to the big pharma system. The "other things in there" argument is the same as razorblades in candy, sanctimony to portray dissent as degeneracy.
I can imagine people in the future looking at us like idiots as they use cannabinoids in the same way we use paracetamol.
From personal experience suffering from chronic pain cannabis is absolutely transformative. The difference between a life spiralling to nothing just about surviving on opioids compared to effective pain relief from cannabis and being able to work and be productive again.
One of the tragedies of the 20th and hopefully not the 21st century. So many people in so much unnecessary pain.
Looking at history I could quite easily come to the conclusion... ...due to racism.
Like all drugs, it’s sad it doesn’t work this way for everyone. I had to transition from cannabis to opiates and lyrica. I wish this was not the case.
They suspect it’s due to the source of the pain (spinal cord injury) and the cannabis is “exciting” my nerves in the wrong way, as it actually increases my pain; or at least my perception of it.
This is a very apt description. It’s like it narrows my entire focus into the pain and it seems to become more…in focus.
You clearly haven’t read either the original law or this one.
It really doesn't. It's well a well-established fact that heavy regulations favor larger enterprises over smaller ones.
I did it several months ago, including the optional adding an outbound firewall rule dropping forwarded UDP/TCP 53 traffic (I tried the redirect rule suggested there first, but it didn't work and the firewall ruleset failed to load, so a drop will have to do. I didn't bother investigating why, because everything on my LANs is configured to use the router as their only nameserver anyway).
I also added a rule dropping it from the router itself in case something breaks, for example if it suddenly decides to start honouring the DHCP-received nameserver addresses (my ISP) despite being configured not to.
EDIT: The article doesn't make this clear, but the bootstrap section is only necessary if you specify upstream nameservers by name (e.g. "https://dns.cloudflare.com/dns-query"). This is not required. For example, you can configure a manual upstream of "tls://1.1.1.1" like I did, and then it doesn't need to do any DNS lookups at all, so does not need to be configured with bootstrap servers, so will not break if you add the 2 firewall rules I mentioned.
[1] https://openwrt.org/docs/guide-user/services/dns/dot_dnsmasq...