I assume this work will be done for Opus as well? Opus has seemingly gotten progressively worse at its prose and technical writing with each version. I've stopped using Claude entirely for now, because it manages to turn even the simplest technical explanation into the most obtuse and obfuscated word salad imaginable. People originally adopted Claude because it felt pleasant to use in comparison to ChatGPT, but I feel like that's really been lost (at least with the Opus line).

I feel dread when I see a wall of text generated by Opus. Every developer I've talked to feels similarly right now.

And low carb vs high carb for T1D is NOT a "good vs bad" equation to start with.

I see almost 4 versions of PKD in VALIS: the narrator, Fat, the narrator instantiated into the story itself, and then the real life author (who is treating this book as semi fictional, semi autobiographical).

This isn't quite what happens. It's actually left extremely ambiguous what's happening and where they are after the explosion.

PKD also invokes Buddhism and Hinduism frequently in the Exegesis. Here's a quote I love from it:

> I have seen the infinities of Judaism, which is morality, of Christianity, which is love, of the Greeks, which is wisdom, and I have seen God’s power as pronoia and charis to rescue me by bending the world itself; but beauty is a perplexing infinity, raising more questions than it answers. It is a puzzle too intricate for me. It spans all else. As I sit across the game board from Krishna I say, “I have found in beauty that which I could not myself have made; thus I have found the benchmarks. I believe, for I have the evidence that I trust; it is sufficient.” There is an infinity of good, of love, of wisdom, of power, but each particular beautiful thing is infinitely beautiful, and there is an infinity of them, so beauty, alone, is an infinity of infinities: ∞2.

From VALIS (which was largely based on his experiences):

> What he did not know then is that it is sometimes an appropriate response to reality to go insane.

> Let it be said that one of the first symptoms of psychosis is that the person feels perhaps he is becoming psychotic. It is another Chinese finger trap. You cannot think about it without becoming part of it. By thinking about madness, Horselover Fat slipped by degrees into madness.

> People suffering nervous breakdowns often do a lot of research, to find explanations for what they are undergoing. The research, of course, fails.

> What struck me was the oddity of a lunatic discounting his hallucinations in this sophisticated manner; Fat had intellectually dealt himself out of the game of madness while still enjoying its sights and sounds.

I would argue it has way more depth and complexity than the majority of modern games. There were so many systems that interacted in interesting ways, and so much player freedom that the devs actually accounted for. Just endless stories of "I tried this bizarre thing that I thought nobody would think of, and the devs actually wrote unique dialogue for this situation".

It's also a bit of a mess and cobbled together, but in a beautiful way.

Pretty appropriate, given a vulnerability of this severity. Literal microservice spaghetti.

(Also, please, let's all move back to boring names for services and servers. Nobody likes trying to decode what all these silly names mean.)

EDIT:

omg, the disclosure communication is infuriating.

> We're on it. It needs some time, but rest assured we're following through. For further communication, i'll recommend reaching out to our CTO

This should have been a P1 that was fixed same day, and they strung him along for months. Absolute amateurs.

The other canonical example of this is the naming of Palantir, of course.

In many cases I think it's less that they misread the fiction, and more that they intentionally model themselves after the villains in fiction.

EDIT: got a great view of it. Fascinating that this dilapidated structure has just been hiding in plain sight all these years.

This is what the execs might THINK but it's not actually based in real evidence. RTO does not make organizations function better. Execs are gaslighting themselves into believing that RTO makes the org function better, but it's an illusion.