Fatherhood

`3:20:31`

So I try to consciously flood the channel in the other direction, and this required a mental shift. I think if you look at my tweets, like, I don't know, five, 10 years ago, they tilted far more negative. If you look at my tweets now, I'd hope-... well, I guess we can do a sentiment analysis and see if it's actually true.

`3:20:55`

... it's more, it's more positive. It's more good vibes. It's more like, "Here's a bunch of cool stuff I found." "Here's what I'm excited about." "Here's what I'm building. Here's some encouragement to other people who are discovering things." I also accept that that is just not how human brains are built for maximum, engagement. Like, there is a, whatever, there's... I literally, I think you can quantify that negative sentiments find, what is it, 50% more traction or something? And eventually that just crowds things out. So that's why so much of the feed is that negative stuff, because we respond to it. But you can make a conscious effort to not do that. This is one of the reasons I've liked TikTok so much. I only use TikTok when I travel, and this actually was the first travel where I didn't use TikTok, and part of the reason was that even though the internet had high download, it was kind of crap anyway. It wasn't Starlink, so I couldn't actually use TikTok on the, on the plane, and I was too engrossed with the agents. But normally when I travel, I watch TikTok. And there it's such a marshmallow test. A video will scroll down and, like, it'll activate some sort of primal instincts of rage or lust or whatever, and if you linger on it, you don't get the marshmallow of science, excitement, art, music, all these other things. You have to be disciplined-

`3:22:21`

... to instantly scroll away-... such that the algorithm doesn't pick up your real preferences. And I find that just to, at the meta game of TikTok-... to be pretty interesting, and then also just fascinating in themself. Again, as we talked about, there are a lot of really funny, really talented people in the world that you would never, ever have heard of if it hadn't been for these platforms.

`3:23:00`

I thought they had a good comeback for a second, and then I don't hear anything about it anymore.

`3:23:06`

But I've been wrong about this before. I mean, I think in February I had a tweet about like, "Oh, all I need is Kimi K 2.5." And in that brief moment, that was true. When I was instructing the agent, I was like, "Oh my God, Kimi's just as good as these other models." But then the game moved forward and-

`3:23:46`

No, I don't think there's that much of an argument at the moment. Codex is very good. I use it all the time. It's my favorite checker. It keeps finding stuff. It's great. But one of the things I've found that I like so much about the current Claude models is they're really good writers out of the box. GPT is a terrible writer out of the box. Like, the pull requests you get on a blank context that you're asking it to open, terrible. Like, really awful writing. The pull requests and descriptions and commit messages and so forth I get out of Claude models-... even though occasionally they can be a little verbose on code comments and you gotta tell them to be succinct. But the writing style is really good. To the point that for a while I was just having it reply on pull requests as me, because I was just using my own account. I was like, "That looks a lot like me, that, like, I could have written that." But then I went like, "Eh, do you know what? That's disingenuous." So no, whenever I have an agent post on my behalf, I always have it sign itself like whatever, Claude on behalf of DHH. But they are still ahead. They have the best harness too, in my opinion. Claude Code is still better. I really like OpenCode too, and I really like some features that they have, but overall I was actually sort of weirdly, I don't know if I was proven wrong, but when Anthropic cut off all the other harnesses from using the subscriptions-... that Open...