> But it has one property much of my previous work lacked: reality gets a vote. Code fails. The parsers disagree. And the data can refuse the story I want to tell. In this project and elsewhere, I am now trying to judge work by what survives outside its own scoreboard: a transferable skill, a finished artifact, a reader, a useful result, an opportunity -- perhaps even a little more freedom.

Sounds like there’s an interesting story in here - but just post the prompt you gave to Claude to write this instead of the model output. Imperfect writing is much preferred to AI’s generic decompressed version of your experience.

OP is Russian, so perhaps this is an inflection of machine translation.