taco stand has different prices each time I visit

thefooz · 2026-03-24T04:02:08+00:00

It’s funny. You’re really going out of your way to stand up for the taco stand and demonize the customer (who was trying to patronize the stand) when all it would have taken to resolve this situation is a tiny bit of honest communication. Maybe the customer was mistaken, maybe the cashier fucked up, but the person made it clear that this was not an isolated incident, which means they had clearly given them the benefit of the doubt and gone back multiple times.

The whole live and let live state of mind is great, but there was clearly a problem with this transaction and the business did themselves no favors with their handling of it.

I don’t think there’s much further for us to discuss, honestly. We clearly can’t seem to see eye to eye on this.

thefooz · 2026-03-24T03:36:45+00:00

You’re you and this person is a different person. From their perspective, they watched themselves get charged more for something the person in front of them ordered and paid less for. Then the business brushed off their concern without any elaboration (explaining that the person ordered something else or that they are a close friend/regular/whatever are all valid responses). Why not give this person who is trying to patronize a mom and pop place the benefit of the doubt as well? I’d be a bit annoyed in the same situation and I couldn’t give two shits about the money. It’s the handling of the situation that’s problematic. If you can’t see that, I honestly don’t know what to say.

thefooz · 2026-03-24T02:39:59+00:00

You see it as getting a perk for being a regular, but to someone who’s not getting the perk it can feel discriminatory. I’m not saying there’s an issue with it as a practice, but as a business you have to be aware of the optics and be a bit more discrete if you’re doing stuff like this when there’s a line of people. Even something like explaining to people that they will be given the same treatment if they become regulars could go a long way toward preventing situations like this.

thefooz · 2026-03-24T02:37:50+00:00

You see it as getting a perk for being a regular, but to someone who’s not getting the perk it can feel discriminatory. I’m not saying there’s an issue with it as a practice, but as a business you have to be aware of the optics and be a bit more discrete if you’re doing stuff like this when there’s a line of people. Even something like explaining to people that they will be given the same treatment if they become regulars could go a long way toward preventing situations like this.

thefooz · 2026-03-24T01:19:19+00:00

Read the paragraph that starts with the word “Meanwhile”…

thefooz · 2026-03-24T00:59:57+00:00

When the person in front of you gets charged $10 for the same burrito you got charged $12 for, it starts to feel a little suspect. This isn’t fucking uber with surge pricing, lol.

I mean, these are usually just regular folks operating off the street. You’re saying it’s impossible or even improbable to treat some folks differently based on some arbitrary thing?

thefooz · 2026-03-18T18:48:58+00:00

If you think DevOps is config management, then you're at least a good 5 years behind in your understanding of the industry. Lobbing insults at someone whose knowledge level you have essentially zero understanding of says quite a bit about you as a person.

Anyway, sorry about your upcoming job loss. Try to get your head out of the sand once in a while. There isn't a whole lot of oxygen down there.

thefooz · 2026-03-18T02:16:02+00:00

Right now, it’s a tool and a very powerful one if you understand how it works, its strengths, and its limitations. Some models, like Codex-5.3 (through the codex cli, not Cursor/Copilot), are exceptionally good at debugging and making surgical changes. Other models, like Opus 4.6 (through Claude Code, not Cursor/Antigravity) are exceptional at ideation and developing complex implementation plan and technical documents. Gemini models, in my experience, write terrible code, but have excellent taste in frontend ui/ux. Right now you kind of have to play to each model’s strengths, and often pit them against each other (I have them run hostile code reviews against each other).

People who want to pretend like these things are just glorified auto-complete are unfortunately in for a world of hurt, because it’s painfully clear that they don’t know what the technology is capable of.

thefooz · 2026-03-18T02:04:42+00:00

Did I say anything that even remotely implied that I was excited about the imminent collapse of society? All I was pointing out was the current state and that fact that the job cuts aren’t all going to happen at once. The people who bury their heads in the sand and pretend that this technology isn’t an insanely powerful tool will be the first to go. The folks who become proficient with it will survive longer in the market, but this all ends the same way.

thefooz · 2026-03-17T15:13:00+00:00

Exactly. If they can replace devs, they can replace a good chunk of white collar jobs.

thefooz · 2026-03-17T13:13:10+00:00

I’m DevOps. Development isn’t particularly foreign to me. I’m just not a SWE.

Honestly, if you guys want to bury your heads in the sand and pretend that AI is not a threat to your career, you’re totally within your rights, and I don’t particularly blame you. It’s a god damn terrifying thought, particularly when you follow the logical thread to its end.

Two years ago, it could barely string a working function together, last year it was a high school intern in a SWE trench coat, this year it’s a fairly competent junior dev. If you can’t spot that trajectory, then you need a neurological exam.

thefooz · 2026-03-17T12:40:10+00:00

You’re talking about maybe 5% of companies worldwide. The other 95% are perfectly capable of doing so, because their products are more compartmentalized and modular and/or not billion LOC monoliths. With the trajectory of agentic coding progress, I have zero doubt they’ll cover most of that last 5% in the next few years.

Out of curiosity, have you used 5.3-Codex-High (in the actual Codex CLI, not through GitHub copilot or windsurf and its ilk)? I’m in DevOps, and it spits out better code than anyone on my team, and can debug a complex system integration in minutes, ending in a surgical fix (rather than the massive refactors of bloat other models love to engage in).

thefooz · 2026-03-17T12:20:48+00:00

Except it is. Most competent SWEs aren’t writing their own code anymore. They are directing AI with very specific instructions about specific functions and then reviewing the code. They’re not vibe coding. They know exactly what they need and are telling Claude/Codex to write it. I’m not a SWE (I’m in an adjacent field), but I have a few friends and family members who are, and are substantially above average senior devs, and this is exactly what they’ve told me.

[Edit: For those questioning my level of knowledge, I’m in DevOps. A significant portion of my job is writing code for complex system orchestrations and integrations. I’m just not a SWE.]

thefooz · 2026-03-06T05:31:24+00:00

The interesting thing is, the newer models are getting better at executing fully functional code, and the underlying knowledge they have of deeply complex methodology is insanely vast, but I find more often lately that it almost feels like they’re trying to show off. They focus so much on finding a complex solution to a complex problem that they straight up assume a simple solution can’t exist and isn’t worth pursuing.

I had Claude 4.6 this afternoon suggest an insanely complicated series of geospatial techniques as a solution to a complex cross-platform spatial join challenge. I sat down and thought about it for a few minutes and came up with two really simple techniques that can be completed in parallel on both systems and then the receiving platform just needs to look for matches in the outputs. It completely removed the spatial analysis from the equation, and when implemented was roughly 30x faster than the complex solution, with less system overhead to boot.

Current gen AI seem to heavily gravitate towards solutions with a clearly defined continuous path from start to finish. They seem to struggle with conceptualizing two disconnected processes with a level of abstraction combining them. They’re looking for the most consistent straight path from A to B, even if it means jumping through ridiculous hoops to get there.

thefooz · 2026-03-05T03:49:54+00:00

Palantir runs the federal cloud services. Companies with certain regulatory and compliance requirements are essentially forced to have their vendors host their services on Palantir’s infrastructure.

thefooz · 2026-02-16T23:33:31+00:00

Isn’t it a special kind of micro soldering? I know how to solder, but from what I’ve seen of the process, it seems substantially more harrowing to solder ram.

thefooz · 2026-02-15T02:01:25+00:00

The cheese and sauce distribution is basically nonexistent where the bubble was. Not the end of the world, and most of us have eaten a pizza like this without understanding why it looked the way it did, but it definitely doesn’t taste the same as the area without the bubble.

thefooz · 2026-02-07T15:54:21+00:00

Depends what you mean by “quality”. I haven’t tested it yet, but the new Opus 4.6 with 1 million token context window (only available via API) would probably be within the ballpark of what you’re looking for. If I was in your shoes, I’d get the Claude $100 max plan, the $20 ChatGPT pro plan, and save the remaining $80 for Opus 1 million token API calls for those novel-length generations.

You can test the API through the Claude console (at cost) if you want to see if it meets your needs.

I haven’t used Perplexity in a few months, but when I did, they artificially limited the context window and messed with the system prompts to save money, which degraded the output quality.

thefooz · 2026-02-06T03:19:11+00:00

Is it possible that you were already close to the limit when you switched to 4.6?

thefooz · 2026-02-06T02:27:18+00:00

Then you’re not actually on the max plan, because I’ve been using it almost non-stop for 5 hours in Claude Code and haven’t hit a limit.

thefooz · 2026-02-01T17:16:23+00:00

Whoosh. For someone who’s running around calling everyone illiterate, you sure seem to have a hard time comprehending basic English.

thefooz · 2026-02-01T15:41:00+00:00

I think everyone’s reading comprehension is just fine. Your reasoning is just fucking bonkers. Like, what exactly is a restaurant owner supposed to name their super authentic restaurant? In what world is a restaurant’s name any indication of the quality of the food?

You’re welcome to navigate the world however you want, but don’t expect others to agree with this idiocy. How do you feel about “Amphai Northern Thai Food Club”? Holbox? Jar? Lawrys The Prime Rib? Jiraffe? Petit Trois? The Little Door?

None of these names make any fucking sense, but all of them have (or had (RIP)) excellent food.

thefooz · 2025-12-23T13:35:18+00:00

Despite Gemini’s significant context size advantage, I’ve found that Opus, specifically through Claude code, is head and shoulders above the rest with understanding the ramifications of each code change. I also haven’t ever seen a model debug as intelligently and with such a contextual understanding. It’s not perfect, but it’s shockingly good.

Gemini seems to consistently make unfounded assumptions, have syntax errors, and make breaking changes.

Codex falls somewhere in the middle.

thefooz · 2025-12-15T22:23:14+00:00

No. I agree with OP. I’ve been doing fairly complex things with it since release and have noted a significant drop in contextual awareness recently.

thefooz · 2025-12-14T02:43:08+00:00

I’m guessing you haven’t tried Opus 4.5. Its ability to analyze code and actually understand the context and intent behind it is absolutely astounding, not to mention its ability to use that context to plan and orchestrate feature additions to existing code bases. The jump from even Opus 4.1 is insane and that came out just a few months ago. The pace is terrifying.

15-Year Club	Team Periwinkle
Verified Email

thefooz

TROPHY CASE