I'll be wanting to find a good workflow to get the markdown transcripts into a git repo with file names that define a suitable sort order and also indicate what the meeting was. So would welcome your suggestions there. Not blocked of course, yo umake it easy to copy from clipboard or from the disk location and rename, but might be nice to have more control about where and how the .md lands.

I might email the support address on the off-chance that you're happy to have support/feature conversations like this. Thanks!

That's not a problem unique to math, or even to academia. It's a problem in every context in human life where people communicate via written documents.

In that situation you have two choices:

1. Tell claude to iterate until the tests for the new view and the old views are all passing.

2. git reset --hard back to the previous commit at which all tests are passing and tell claude to try again, making sure not to break any tests.

It's essential to use tests when vibecoding anything non trivial. Almost certainly in a TDD style.

Hey I don't want to over simplify, I'm sure it was complicated, but did the author have functional tests for these broken views? As long as there are functional tests passing on the previous commit I'd have thought that claude could look at the end situation and work out how to get the desired feature without breaking the other stuff.

TUIs aren't an exception, it's still essential to have a way to end-to-end test each view.

But on the other hand his thoughts at the end are interesting. Summary:

Maybe our "consciousness" is like an LLM's intelligence. But if not, then it raises the question of why do we even have this "extra" consciousness, since it appears that something like a humanoid LLM would be decent at surviving. His suggestions: maybe our extra thing is an evolutionary accident (and maybe there _are_ successful organisms out there with the LLM-style non-conscious intelligence), or maybe as evolved organisms it's necessary that we really feel things like pain, so that evolutionary mechanisms like pain (and desire for food, sex etc) had strong adaptive benefits.

This is good, but it doesn't go far enough:

> ... the problem with security measures that cause too much friction is that users tend to disable them in order to get on with their work. To fulfill its security purposes, a good trust system needs to stay out of your way.

The language is richer and all diagram types are implemented consistently in the same language in a way that can be composed, as opposed to being a collection of unrelated DSLs.

The improved visual appearance is clear from inspecting example diagrams, I believe.

It's certainly worth discussing the fact that the entire industry is starting to outsource large amounts of our thinking and writing work to non-sentient statistical algorithms, but this discussion needs to honestly confront the extent to which they are successfully completing useful tasks today.