You really thought you were cooking here, too.

I did! I thought I was funny! We'll, today was my turn to be an idiot on the internet.

Nice. Did you use AI? (I'm being half-sarcastic, and half wanting to confirm that this is an accurate reproduction of the text in the original)

Yes for the plumbing, no for the text.

Codex helped write the converter, but the EPUB text is parsed from the Vatican HTML. The script doesn’t rewrite or summarize anything; it just repackages the source into EPUB with TOC, footnotes, metadata, and cover.

Appreciate your work, I prefer the EPUB format. Maybe including this confirmation in the repo's README could be of help for those who stumble upon it.

"When people see an artifact, they make assumptions about the process that was used to create it. Without even thinking about it, they assume the creator had a basically human state of mind. This assumption is no longer true."

I've been running into this experience with non-code artifacts, like slideshows and documents.

I'm not worried about my privacy. No one can read the dark text on that page anyhow.

I agree (at least for now) that Claude Design doesn't directly compete with the core Figma tool. It does directly compete with Figma Make - which is also an LLM-powered tool that generates HTML/CSS/JS output (not a canvas of components, like Figma's core product).

I do think Figma will have a problem that people with think Claude Design competes with Figma directly.

I expect people in leadership positions aren't comparing "Claude Design vs. Figma", but area comparing "Me and my product manager using Claude Design vs. A designer using Figma."

My first guitar teacher told me that someday I'd start to notice that you can't get all strings perfectly in tune. At that point, he said, you'll know you're getting somewhere on the guitar.

With an ordinary fretted guitar, you can sort of perfectly tune it to what you play but not perfectly tune it in a global sense.

That’s an issue with tuning instruments in general, and why pianos are generally slightly out of tune as a compromise.

As you get used to a particular guitar and strings, as you train your ear, you can also learn to work around the imperfections by adjusting how you hold down the strings (even with a fretted guitar, you can slightly repitch a string by holding it differently).

Classical guitarists are used to pushing nylon strings into consonance by compressing the string either towards the nut or the bridge. Not so easy with steel, where players will just preemptively retune to whatever chords are most prominent in the song.

I play with generally lighter strings. 8.5-40 mighty slinky fender scale. I noticed when I switched my fingers pay much more attention to pressure, and being in tune with microbends.

Been thinking of going a bit lighter recently, and also getting a classical.

Get obsessed over the perfect tuning. Blame the imperfections on the quality of the guitar. Don't play until you get a better guitar. Repeat until you give up. Then actually start playing the damn thing.

Yes exactly. Although I didn't buy a new guitar, but a dozen tuners. It finally clicked when I got one that was "real time" enough to see how the tuning shifts from high to low. This was before smartphones could do it.

Doesn't help that most tuners are still dog slow, none of the beginners courses properly tell you how the guitar actually works, or what a "chord" really is. They're all just "play this and don't worry about it". To be fair it does get you going.

I didn't even read the article, but the headline made me smile.

The biggest "TBD" I've ever seen (in the slide deck for the winning entry):

"(TBD ethics of voluntary euthanasia)"

For as many times as they mention it, it would seem that it is not really TBD.

Are there benevolent AI swarms?

That was close. We almost had clarity on something for a minute.