Try Kimi in Kimi CLI and Claude Code and try saying that again. Kimi quickly collapses into tool calling loops without measures in their CLI but not in Claude Code and is largely useless for any long running tasks in harnesses not taking this into account.
With those measures (which are actually quite interesting) it can at times perform at Sonnet level.
I take public transport a lot and walk a lot (I live 3h walk from central London - I know because I've walked it, for fun), but I still also use Uber regularly because sometimes I simply don't have time. If I lived in the centre I probably would have very little use for it, but for people even slightly outside the core of cities well served by public transport, it's usually nice to have options.
It wasn't that interesting. I had a healthcare appointment near Victoria and had a half day off and decided to walk home. I regularly do 2h walks, so it wasn't a big stretch... It wasn't a particularly exciting walk - mostly very similar stretches of semi-urban areas after the first 30m or so.
You are citing a single use of em-dashes in a single 30 year old article as proof of something.
If anything, the length of that article shows how rarely em-dashes were used by most writers. They're like exclamatory versions of semicolons, a contrived sudden interruption, a sort of inversion of the three dot "…" elipsis. Maybe the em-dash cracked and fell on the floor.
The reason LLMs use a lot of em-dashes is because that's a format they've chosen for output. Thinking that LLMs have a lot of em-dashes because works in the wild have a lot of em-dashes is like thinking that LLM output has a lot of emoticons because a lot of essayists use emoticons to mark subject divisions in the text.
A single one is sufficient evidence that calling out a single em-dash as evidence of AI use is flawed. Especially when it is from the same magazine.
There are also em-dashes in a huge number of their articles. I didn't spend time picking one. I just went back to the oldest article in the first category I picked, and found one on the first try. It's a common style for more "serious" magazines and always has been.
> Thinking that LLMs have a lot of em-dashes because works in the wild have a lot of em-dashes is like thinking that LLM output has a lot of emoticons because a lot of essayists use emoticons to mark subject divisions in the text.
No, thinking they do is like having read a lot of literary text and being aware of how it has a long history of being used in serious writing.
For me, it's entirely ended my tablet use, and now rarely reach for a laptop. I still have a desktop with two large screens, but I don't feel a need for anything in between any more.
The screen is big enough for me that given it's always in my pocket it's far more convenient to grab my phone than getting up to grab my tablet or laptop.
I find myself unable to fold it in public as I'm worried it puts a target on my back. Albeit, with more folds coming to market it will be seen less as a premium.
I do have a laptop, and two large screens for my desktop, and my foldable is still a massive upgrade. I haven't used my tablet since I got it. I use my phone for things I'd often grab my laptop for etc.
I hardly use the thing closed, even for things I easily could.
I have a Pixel Fold and similar experience - some minor nuisances but not come across anything that doesn't work. The biggest nuisance is apps restarting when switching from the front screen to the big screen.
Some weird OS experiences with my Fold recently.. the bottom of the home screen shortcut bar is appearing over apps, unexpectedly. Namely Monarch Money
I think in general stripping away the parts you agree with from the argument works great, because it strips away a whole lot of potential for ending up indirectly arguing over things that aren't in contention, and it often also defuses the rest when it turns out the core of the argument perhaps is much smaller than people are willing to get invested in.
How do you do that without sounding negative? Because by doing that there's the risk of the general impression "we didn't agree", as you basically focused on the disagreements.
"You're totally right about X and Y. I think the only thing we disagree about is Z". People like being told they're right, and you then downplay the importance of the actual remaining disagreement. Often that lowers the stakes for people. They've already "won" since you agreed with most of what they said, so the rest becomes less important.
Repeating back what someone said (specifically: trying to mirror their exact words as best you can remember them) also has proven psychological effects: increased empathy and calming of your own emotional response and theirs.
The rhyming is good, making "Oldavista" a generic wordplay that is merely more obvious to find for German speakers, and the name is insignificant compared to the effort of reproducing the whole Altavista page.
reply