Yeah. There's some solid work in there, but it reads like an LLM without a review pass.

This paragraph has an awkward rhythm:

> Getting more into the nitty-gritty, we also closed a subsecond-precision loss when inserting timestamps over HTTP (#300), and to top it all off, a broader static-analysis pass over the codebase turned up and fixed a handful of other latent bugs (#313); these hadn't showed up in the field, but were worth closing before they could.

Even just asking Claude to apply Strunk and White makes it much easier to read:

> We also fixed a loss of subsecond precision in timestamps inserted over HTTP (#300). A static-analysis pass over the codebase turned up several other latent bugs (#313); none had surfaced in the field, but we fixed them anyway.

And its diagnosis of why the original is tricky shows an LLM is more than capable of improving readability given a couple of review passes:

> Three things make it awkward, and they pile up:

> 1. Two bits of throat-clearing. "Getting more into the nitty-gritty" and "to top it all off" both just say here comes the next thing. Neither tells you anything. Back to back, they read as filler.

> 2. Mixed tone. "Nitty-gritty" and "to top it all off" are chatty; "subsecond-precision loss" and "static-analysis pass" are dry and technical. The sentence keeps switching voice.

> 3. Too much in one sentence. Two unrelated fixes joined by a semicolon, plus a clause hanging off the second one, plus the trailing "before they could." By the end, you've lost track of what "they could" was about — the thing it points back to is thirty words behind you.

It's a shame when solid technical work gets obscured by the poor SNR of default LLM output, when clarity is only a few iterations away.

It's a weird feeling, having my prose reviewed as if they were written by a machine. "Move the needle" is a scar from my time at Google. Nitty-gritty is an artefact of all the iteration I did on that paragraph; the original was far too technical to justify its place in a little writeup. "To top it all off" was just how I chose to set a tone of wrapping up after a list that was at least as exhausting to write as it seems to be to read. And just for the record, multiple people from my team reviewed this, so if it turns out we lack your proclivity for good English style or your journalistic rigor and standards for what's ready to publish, it wasn't for a lack of "a few iterations." I suppose it would have been good of me to give my team more time with the draft; a good chunk of what you cited was a byproduct of me hastily responding to their comments.

Much more covert, and civilian infrastructure also less likely to be blown up.

It seems to me this makes broadcast towers targets.

With their movement you might get some strange SAR like effects. Computationally complex but could add another dimension over a static tower.

This was done in the analogue age https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Am_Sitting_in_a_Room

Thanks! Was hoping someone would do something more sane like this.

Openclaw is very useful, but like you I share the sentiment of it being terrifying, even before you introduce the social network aspect.

My Mac mini is currently literally switched off for this very reason.

Meditation has many techniques. Similar to how people have many different motivations and programs when they have a regular gym practice. Strength is different to agility is different to flexibility.

MCTB or Dhamma overground might have been a less confronting link to share :)

In more formal traditions the focus on breath (or similar) is to develop concentration/samatha/samadhi. The focus on sensations is the insight/vipassana component, and often this is where the tension bubbles up to the surface. Keeping calm (equanimous) during this process can indeed be non-trivial!

It sounds like you have come to a practice very similar to a lot of the Burmese traditions of insight meditation, which is quite fascinating.

I think they’re just focussing on the Samatha concentration aspect?

There’s some nice plugins too, some are finance related: https://github.com/ddotta/awesome-polars

The one thing I really want is for someone to make it so I can use it in F#. Presumably it's possible given how the python bit is implemented under the hood?

It uses pyo3 to generate the bindings, so you would have to find a similar crate for F#/.NET and port the polars Python FFI to it. If such a crate does not exist, it will be even more work.