> No, you can do things that benefit you electorally, but are also just the right thing to do. Changing the voting system from FPTP would obviously benefit parties other than the major ones, but that doesn't mean it'd be wrong for those parties to do it if they got into power

You're reinforcing my point.

Minor parties (who might collectively be popular with the electorate) will never be able to change the voting methodology to their advantage because FPTP keeps the incumbents in place, and only the incumbents have the power to choose the voting system. So democracy suffers and the incumbents benefit.

Similarly, in this case, allowing children to vote helps the incumbents stay in place despite their party, and their leader being deeply unpopular with the electorate overall. So democracy suffers and the incumbents benefit.

This is a fair argument but it’s rapidly becoming a non-argument.

LLMs have come a long way since ChatGPT 4.

The idea that they’ll always value quick answers, and always be prone to hallucination seems short-sighted, given how much the technology has advanced.

I’ve seen Claude do iterative problem solving, spot bad architectural patterns in human written code, and solve very complex challenges across multiple services.

All of this capability emerging from a company (Anthropic) that’s just five years old. Imagine what Claude will be capable of in 2030.

If you use plan mode, parallel agents and voice dictation, LLM-powered development becomes much faster and more powerful.

Claude has helped me learn that the thing I enjoyed was actually delivering good software, as opposed to crafting syntax.

> There is no reasonable definition of "the Left" that includes the British Labour party.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Party_(UK)

> Labour, is one of the two main political parties in the United Kingdom, along with the Conservative Party. It sits on the centre-left of the left–right political spectrum