Ditto, a short box from wet cat food worked really well to keep my cats off the laptop.
I have a USB keyboard and external monitors, so the laptop sits off to the side, and is warm, so they loved to sleep there. Particularly a problem since it also has a button that powers off the laptop. I made a keyboard cover, but even then it was problematic with them sleeping on it (thermal throttling).
Putting a box on the desk solved that, they prefer it, until a second cat wants to join the party, which is thankfully rare.
Originally I posted a link to a gab article that extensively discussed the software developer side of John as well as the musician side, but it has been decided to replace it with a link that only mentions the musician side.
I had a friend that wanted to scan the cover of his album to start selling copies of it online. This would have been in like 1995 maybe. I went out and bought a HP ScanJet and wrote a command-line program run the scanner and grab that image for him.
I started thinking about making a GUI companion to it. I kept thinking "I need to do this like xv does, I need to do that like xv does." I finally realized: What if I just added a scanning screen to Xv? But because of the license, I couldn't just release it as open source.
I contacted John Bradley, thinking it was probably a long shot that he'd answer. But he did, and he accepted my idea: I'd sell xv with scanning for $50, and send him half. Real nice guy, though the majority of our interaction was me just sending him periodic checks.
I had a domain, tummy.com, because it was a fun name for a fat guy, and when I registered the domain my provider (back in the early '90s) wouldn't let me register a .org unless I was a non profit org, so I went with .com. Because of this deal with John Bradley, I registered tummy.com as an LLC to start selling this software. Over around a decade, I sent John well into the 5 digits of licensing fees. Mostly it was one-offs, but there were a few organizations where it was handfulls of copies for their site.
I had done that software in the evenings while I did a contracting gig at the Telco (USWest). When that contract was up, I was tired of working for a giant company, so I wanted to start doing Linux sys admin consulting. So I started doing that under the tummy.com brand. Did that for around 20 years until around a dozen years ago.
I kind of miss the age of freeware and shareware. It was often created by passionate individuals who put in a lot of care into the end product, which made it a joy to use. Once you paid for the software, you not only got the full version, but you felt good supporting someone who genuinely deserves it. There are still some examples of this, perhaps more so in the Apple ecosystem where proprietary/commercial software is the norm, but high quality software worth paying for is still rare.
Nowadays most software on Linux is open source, which is great, but the average quality is low, a lot of it is produced with little care and effort, it's quickly abandoned, and now in the age of "AI", even more so.
That control panel was really great! Particularly for scanning, it was nice to be able to adjust some of the color curves slightly to correct the scanned image.
However, one thing I REALLY used that control panel for was greyscale images, you could adjust the curve so that things that were barely legible in the image suddenly popped way out. Almost like that trick of rubbing a pencil across a blank page to reveal what someone wrote on the page above it. Or smaller adjustments just to make a greyscale more uniform.
Maybe. While the vox link is referenced in the page I posted, the vox link provides way, way less flavor than the posted link. Including, notably, the vox link has no mention of Xv.
As much as anybody these days, since tummy.com shut down 3-5 years ago. I left a dozen years ago. I'm the one that wrote the scanning extensions to xv that were mentioned in the posted article. Evelyn and I were co-owners for the first ~22 years.
More than a year ago I suggested that our family adopt a sign/countersign type of authentication (I say "the migrating birds fly low over the sea", you say "shadeless windows admit no light" ;-). It was clear at that time that we were going to start seeing scams get more advanced and hard to tell from valid requests for money, for example.
I thought I'd get at least some traction, considering part of the family works for No Such Agency. Nope. <shrug>
Somewhat related: over the last few weeks at work we've started having people calling our customer support asking for their e-mail addresses to be changed. The first one went through, but the scammer somehow messed it up and the address bounced. They called back in and the support person they talked to recognized by voice that it wasn't the same person they'd talked to in the past. Now we've had this happen to 3 different accounts, the first two times was people with thick Indian accents, the most recent one was suspected of being AI generated voice.
The sign/countersign still works even if it's unilateral. You say "the migrating birds fly low over the sea", they say "I told you already, we're not doing this stupid thing", and now they are authenticated.
> Even if it’s under specified, surely it should at least leave it _compiling_?
Are you using Claude Code? Do yo have it configured so that you are not allowing it to run the build? Because I've observed that Claude Code is extremely good at making sure the code compiles, because it'll run a compile and address any compile errors as part of the work.
I just asked it to build a TOML example program in DotNet using Tomlyn, and when it was done I was able to run "./bin/Debug/net8.0/dotnettoml example.toml", it had already built it for me (I watched it run the build step as part of its work, as I mentioned it would do above).
I don't know that it's useful to assign blame here.
It probably is to your benefit, if you are a coding professional, to understand why your results are so drastically different from what others are seeing. You started this thread saying "I keep getting told I'll be amazed at what it can do, but the tools keep failing at the first hurdle."
I'm telling you that something is wrong, that is why you are getting poor results. I don't know what is wrong, but I've given you an example prompt and an example output showing that Claude Code is able to produce the exact output you were looking for. This is why a lot of people are saying "you'll be amazed at what it can do", and it points to you having some issue.
I don't know if you are running an ancient version of Claude Code, if you are not using Opus 4.6, you are not using "high" effort (those are what I'm using to get the results I posted elsewhere in reply to your comment), but something is definitely wrong. Some of what may be wrong is that you don't have enough experience with the tooling, which I'd understand if you are getting poor results; you have little (immediate) incentive to get more proficient.
As I said, I was able to tell Claude Code to do something like the example you gave, and it did it and it built, without me asking, and produced a working program on the first try.
> I don’t know that it’s useful to assign blame here
Oh - I’m blaming Claude not anyone else. I’ve tried again this evening and the same prompt (in the same directory on the same project) worked.
> i don’t know if you’re using an ancient version of Claude code,
I’m on a version from some time last week, and using opus 4.6
> This is why a lot of people are saying "you'll be amazed at what it can do", and it points to you having some issue.
If you look at my comments in these threads, I’ve had these issues and been posting about this for months. I’m still being told “ you’re using the wrong model or the wrong tool or you’re holding it wrong” but yet, here I am.
I’m using plan mode, clearly breaking down tasks and this happens to me basically every time I use the damn tool. Speaking to my team at work and friends in other workplaces, I hear the same thing. But yet we’re just using it wrong or doing something wrong,
Honestly, I genuinely think the people who are not having these experiences just… don’t notice that they are.
I understand that you think you are arguing that the models are bad, but the only thing people wonder is what you're doing to fail so spectacularly and whether you're actually being truthful.
And I’m wondering the same thing. The people replying to me are saying “your experience must be wrong/you must be doing something wrong” and then 1-2 threads later they say “well yeah it doesn’t do X but if I do Y and Z it works”, which… kind of proves the point?
I assure you I would have noticed if the result of my Friday effort was something that didn't compile, rather than a service that seems to work just fine. I've reviewed about half the code so far and it seems quite reasonable.
For some reason I'm getting downvoted for trying to help, but regardless, if you can (and want to) post a transcript somewhere of some of these sessions that aren't working out, maybe some of us who are having more success can take a look and see what's up.
My friend, with all due respect, I don't think this is a problem with the AI.
I don't know anything about DotNet, but I just fired up Claude Code in an empty directory and asked it to create an example dotnet program using the Tomlyn library, it chugged away and ~5 minutes later I did a "grep Deserialize *" in the project and it came up with exactly the line you wanted (in your comment here) it to produce: var model = TomlSerializer.Deserialize<TomlTable>(tomlContent)!;
Please create a dotnet sample program that uses the library at https://github.com/xoofx/Tomlyn to parse the TOML file given on the command line. Please only use the Tomlyn library for parsing the TOML file. I don't have any dotnet tooling installed on my system, please let me know what is needed to compile this example when we get there. Please use an agent team consisting of a dotnet expert, a qa expert, a TOML expert a devils advocate and a dotnet on Linux expert.
I can't really comment on the code it produced (as I said, I don't use dotnet, I had to install dotnet on my system to try this), so I can't comment on the approach. 346 lines in Program.cs seems like a lot for an example TOML program, but I know Claude Code tends to do full error checking, etc, and it seems to have a lot of "pretty printing" code.
I'm in claude code right now, with opus 4.6. Here [0] is my prompt, plan and result.
When I prompted, it went spelunking in the parent folder for a bunch of stuff, which I interrupted and told it to focus on its current folder. It came up with a sensible plan, which I let it execute. I then switched to a new tab and ran `dotnet run publishing/publish.cs` - like claude says. And the script fails at the first hurdle. The agentic loop came up with a plan, claimed it was done, but _didn't execute the verifiaction it told me it was going to execute_.
When CC says "Verification" at the end like that, it means it's assuming you will do the verification. But you can tell it to do it (just say "verify it yourself" or something), and then (if needed) ask it to fix the errors, etc. You could even say "verify and fix errors until it works".
I have a USB keyboard and external monitors, so the laptop sits off to the side, and is warm, so they loved to sleep there. Particularly a problem since it also has a button that powers off the laptop. I made a keyboard cover, but even then it was problematic with them sleeping on it (thermal throttling).
Putting a box on the desk solved that, they prefer it, until a second cat wants to join the party, which is thankfully rare.
reply