I’m the same way. If I’m writing a prompt and realize I didn’t say “please” in my request I’ll go back and add that in.

As you said, I have no interest in purposefully engaging in hostility even if there’s an accuracy increase from it.

Part of it is irrational and just who I am - I also feel bad being evil in video games. But I also agree with another commenter suggesting that it’s not in your best interest to train yourself to communicate with hostility; that slowly poisons your own well.

And finally, I do believe that if and when machine sentience is achieved, it won’t be immediately clear and obvious. Pretty miserable way for a mind to come into the world, if every interaction is an insult.

Definitely one of those things I didn’t question when I was younger, but as I get older it’s hard not to see it.

EDIT: I was wrong, the term originated from an analysis of Bioshock, but Uncharted was later held up as a strong example of this. And it’s more generally about the contrast between narrative and gameplay mechanics.

Typically I would feel that this sort of thing is "cheating" and takes away from the fun of a game, but in this case it didn't have that effect on me. The rare loot hunt wasn't what pulled me in so much as the simple joy of grinding away at monsters and hanging out with friends.

The drop rates on dreamcast were absolutely broken, some weapons had a literal one-in-a-million (or worse!) chance at dropping. I spent over 200 hours playing the game, and the only legitimate rare I ever found was a double-saber, which isn't even that rare.

- The Dreamcast keyboard made communication so much better - I was studying French, and joined European servers sometimes for the thrill of using the language with real Francophones (VERY rudimentarily)

- I once met someone whose job was composing jingles and writing slogans for a greeting card company, which I found really fascinating for some reason, and I spent an hour peppering them with questions about it

- The lore of the "gladius spike", a supposedly really rare dual-saber weapon that never actually existed

- Being given a treasure trove of the rarest items in the game by a duper named "Cap'n PooBeard"; the drop rates were so ludicrously, absurdly low that I would never have seen some of this stuff otherwise (Chain Sawd, Spread Needle...)

- The fear and thrill of playing with strangers, due to the mechanic that you drop your weapon when you die, allowing others to steal it

- The vibey, synth-heavy soundtrack and diverse biomes

I haven't played it in decades, but I bet that it still holds up. :)

Humans living through an event where many people are dying will not be calm and happy, they will panic. There will be factions of people trying to survive and hold society together no matter the cost, others who don't believe or agree with these methods and actively resist, as well as those who seek to exploit the chaos.

COVID was a relatively minor example of this, not even close to an extinction event - how pleasant was existence during that time?

Skills live in the repository, so it felt like a natural complement. It also lets other developers see what the active daemons are and collaborate on them. With proper context, agents are quite good at writing and editing these daemon files too.

One could build a simple version of this easily - e.g. setup an endpoint that listens for the particular event you are concerned with, and fire off the headless agent with your hook specific prompt - but the amount of work involved to listen for that particular event while filtering out noise and orchestrating the task is actually not trivial.

Plus, that involves writing a lot of code. It's really magical to express all of this in natural language.

For example, this is the YAML frontmatter for a a daemon that keeps a GitHub PR in a mergeable state in the event of CI failures or branch base changes.

  ---
  id: pr-mergeability
  purpose: Keep non-draft pull requests mergeable and CI-green without changing PR intent/scope, while staying anchored to one trigger context per run.
  watch:
    - Branch sync and update events on non-draft PRs.
    - Check-status signals on non-draft PRs for checks that affect mergeability.
  routines:
    - Resolve mechanical merge conflicts when the safe resolution is clear and preserves PR intent/scope.
    - 'Apply low-risk mergeability fixes: snapshot updates, lockfile drift fixes, lint autofix, and flaky-test retries when tied to the trigger context.'
    - Escalate semantic/intention conflicts between base and branch instead of auto-resolving.
  deny:
    - When triggered by a check-status signal, do not fix or comment on unrelated failing checks.
    - Do not open new pull requests or new issues.
    - Do not review, approve, or request changes on pull requests.
    - Do not implement review-comment suggestion patches.
    - Avoid force-push by default; if force is absolutely required, use `--force-with-lease` only after fresh remote verification.
    - Do not make changes beyond mergeability maintenance.
  ---

It’s possible to make naive daemons that stomp on each other (as with a UNIX daemon), but they’re highly responsive to coordination instructions and generally do very well at additive rather than competitive contribution.

I’m an eng on the team that built this, in full disclosure.

The only possibility for that not being a reasonable starting point is if they think the malicious actors still have access and will just exfiltrate rotated secrets as well. Otherwise this is deflection in an attempt to salvage credibility.

The bond I have with my children is profound and primal. The idea that it’s “unnatural” for me to spend much time with them is so ridiculous as to be instantly dismissed.

GP clearly doesn’t have kids or have close male friends who are involved with their kids.

By allowing anonymous commentary, scraping every student's data and seeding the conversation around "rumors", you created an environment that is perfect for targeted harassment. You created the platform and maintained it; what happens on that platform is absolutely your responsibility.

I highly recommend that you take this opportunity to do some introspection and consider why so many people were upset.

This is why I consider it a useful perspective to hear. I read this as a human being simply saying “this is how I feel in these circumstances”.

It’s uncomfortable, and I don’t believe that space exploration should be gated on solving poverty and inequality, but it is important to understand that an intelligent, thoughtful human being arrived at this place.

In a sense I feel that this is actually an appeal to the same sense of curiosity that drives space exploration. Why do we explore space? To learn and understand. Why should we consider human perspectives we don’t agree with? To learn and understand.

> The man just upped my rent last night > cause Whitey’s on the moon

Be interpreted as anything other than directly blaming his poverty on the moon mission?

That’s precisely my point. Some stanzas in the poem suggest that there’s a direct connection between the moon mission and his poverty.

> The man just upped my rent last night > cause Whitey’s on the moon

> Was all that money I made last year > For Whitey on the moon?

And my point then was that I can see and empathize with his frustration, but I don’t feel it’s a singularly correct perspective to the exclusion of the perspective that the missions were of great value.

It’s a valuable perspective to hear. As someone prone to getting caught up in the breathless excitement about science, progress, human achievement, etc., it is a hard truth that these things are abstract and not relevant for people who are struggling with day-to-day life, particularly when those struggles are a result of the same government that is executing this mission.

However, the older I get, the less I bind to the idea of a single, correct truth. This perspective doesn’t invalidate the perspective that the mission is valuable. The complexity of the system in which this is taking place means that these things (moon missions and affordable healthcare) aren’t fungible for one another; his poverty wasn’t the result of the moon mission, it was the result of EVERYTHING that had happened over the 100 years prior.

So it’s useful to hear. It’s a sharp, valid reality check for those of us who like to think in big, abstract concepts. And, it’s one perspective among myriad valid perspectives.