I don't know but I've been using Firefox since forever and I can't even recall the tabs changing at all. Of course they have changed many times over the course of years, but that happens in every browser. I don't know what happened to tabs that affected you so badly? I feel like it's an excuse for some people sometime that if some little thing in the UI changes that they claim their whole flow is now compromised so that is the reason they are now using this other software, where the same stuff happens as far as I can see.

I'm obviously not just talking about the tabs. And "some little UI thing" can absolutely break your workflow - UI isn't just how things look. Mozilla purged lots of minor features over the years, and the goto excuse was usually "parity with Chrome" or "telemetry".

Some things you can easily dismiss with the proof of the opposite or something conflicting. But some parts of the hypothesis can't be either disproofed or proofed.

You could personally dismiss it, but you can't proof your point either. Like general archeology says humanity is only as old as the oldest evidence of it ever found, and some pseudo scientific hypothesis might say humans are older. You can't prove or disprove that. But you can't prove or disprove either that humanity is exactly as old as the oldest evidence we have. But when some older bones are discovered then you have proof that humanity is at least that old.

So yeah, absence of evidence doesn't disprove the hypothesis.

Why do you need evidence to write books about a hypotheses you have? Many people do that. And I think he never claimed to know the truth about it, he was just presenting his ideas of how it could be.

You don't have to agree with it. But the lack of evidence doesn't disprove the hypothesis. Yes it doesn't prove it either.

You can write as many books as you like. But if you spend all your energy trying to convince people of your unproven hypothesis, rather than testing and proving that hypothesis, no one has to take you seriously.

Some things can't be tested (easily). There are many string theory scientists that wrote many books about a completely unproven theory. I guess you take them equally seriously.

Many people have already done and still do and will keep doing it. But yeah it's doesn't add much value.

No syntax highlighting, I do like to review snippets of code. Also the interactive questions / answers during planning would be a pain over email. And what about text wrapping? Headache.

Edit: also setting up an email interface API to Claude Code seems like a lot more work than just setting up a VPN.

What about Saddam Hussein?

Wasn't he basically executed with extra steps after thoroughly trashing his county first?

I think that's a different thing.

You still want to be able to easily review the LLM generated code. At least I want to.

They pay lots of humans to train the LLMs..

Did you read?

So you mean you don't completely empty it and then put dirty dishes back inside among the clean ones?