DigitalSea

Yes

Martin, I just wanted to say you've built something awesome here. I'm the player Vheissu you might see who has been topping the leaderboard. I would love to help you expand upon the game and make it even better. I'm a bit addicted to it, but think being able to have other avenues to expand the mechanics would be awesome (think maintenance costs, fuel costs, market volatility around fuel, etc). If you're down for a collaborator, I'd love to get involved. It's got a lot of potential.

The problem is Coilot is dumb. Allegedly using the same models ChatGPT does, but Microsoft seems to have done something to Copilot which lobotomises it so badly it's unusable for anything serious. Great for the MS ecosystem integration, but as a general purpose tool, it's nowhere near ChatGPT.

Yay.

WFH autonomy isn’t trivial, it’s about reclaiming control of your time, environment, and productivity. If collective action focuses narrowly yet powerfully on securing that benefit, the leverage is clear. Companies resisting WFH often rely on isolated dissent; collective solidarity flips that script. Risky? Sure. But meaningful rights rarely arrive quietly. Worth the fight.

No.

Your app might gamify speech practice, but it overlooks crucial elements: nuanced human judgment, emotional rapport, and adaptive interpersonal communication. Speech therapists don’t just correct sounds; they navigate psychological nuances, adjust dynamically based on subtle cues, and foster genuine motivation through trust. AI might imitate, but can’t authentically replicate this.

Parents wary of therapy’s cost and engagement issues might initially bite, but sustained improvement demands personalised professional insight. Edtech and AI thrive as complements, not replacements.

Reframe your positioning clearly as a supplemental practice tool, not a replacement for professional therapy, or risk selling parents a mirage.

My 2004 5 series BMW had this (it was called iDrive). A command style knob that could move on an axis of sorts (up and down, left, right). You could also press it in. I absolutely hated it.

I learned this lesson the hard way with my early 2000s BMW 5 Series (a 2004 model). It had a single joystick-style knob (iDrive, if I remember correctly) controlling a screen that handled everything—climate, settings, and more. The problem? It was an all-in-one system, completely integrated with vehicle functions, which meant you couldn’t swap it out for a newer or better OEM system. You were stuck with aging tech, and once the screen or computer started acting up, there were no simple fixes. No cheap button replacement, no easy upgrades.

Compare that to an old LandCruiser or similar vehicle from the ’80s. Physical controls still work decades later, and worst-case scenario, you replace a button or a switch for pocket change. Meanwhile, modern cars are turning into disposable tech products, destined for obsolescence the moment their proprietary systems fail. It's for this reason when I bought a new car a couple of years ago, I opted for a Toyota LandCruiser, the use of physical buttons (despite coming with touchscreens now) makes a huge difference when you're driving and want to press a button to change music or turn the volume up/down.

Not sure if people picked up on it, but this is being powered by the unreleased o3 model. Which might explain why it leaps ahead in benchmarks considerably and aligns with the claims o3 is too expensive to release publicly. Seems to be quite an impressive model and the leading out of Google, DeepSeek and Perplexity.

I love Sublime Text editor. Have been using it for 15 years now and despite the fact most of my development is done inside of VSCode or other editors, I still use ST for large files and notes. I can confidently open up a 1gb SQL dump in ST and it won't break a sweat, try that in VSCode and you can see it freeze up for a bit and that's on a decent machine too.

This is like watching a carpenter blame their hammer because they didn’t measure twice. AI is a tool, it's like a power tool for a tradesperson: it'll amplify your skills, but if you let it steer the whole project? You’ll end up with a pile of bent nails.

LLMs are jittery apprentices. They'll hallucinate measurements, over-sand perfectly good code, or spin you in circles for hours. I’ve been there back in the GPT-4 days especially, nothing stings like realising you wasted a day debugging AI’s creative solution to a problem you could've solved in 20 minutes.

When you treat AI like a toolbelt, not a replacement for your own brain? Magic. It’s killer at grunt work like; explaining regex, scaffolding boilerplate, or untangling JWT auth spaghetti. You still gotta hold the blueprint. AI ain't some magic wand: it’s a nail gun. Point it wrong, and you’ll spend four days prying out mistakes.

Sucks it cost you time, but hey, now you know to never let the tool work you. It's hopefully a lesson OP learns once and doesn't let it sour their experience with AI, because when utilised properly, you can really get things done, even if it's just the tedious/boring stuff or things you'd spend time Google bashing, reading docs or finding on StackOverflow.

So apparently, Sam Altman is so skilled he can cast magic spells on people? This just all adds credence to the fact he was fired because of a coup.

The fact the new CEO can't even get answers from the board is quite telling. Looks like the OpenAI board wants those investor lawsuits. And allegedly the Quora guy Adam D'Angelo is the ringleader of all this?

I have Aurelia 1 apps that have been in production since 2015. They don't need to be really touched. But, when they do, they're really easy to modify. I am currently using Aurelia 2 and will have similar scalable apps that will be in production for years to come too.

I am not saying HTMX is terrible or anything. What you've built is cool and I've built something with it. The point I was making wasn't made very well. What I meant was good options are often left out of the conversation because of React, Vue and for a while there, Svelte. There are a lot of great libraries and frameworks that nobody talks about, HTMX included. I just feel like HTMX isn't being hyped because it's good, but because of the memes/marketing aspect. I think it's a disservice to your work, which deserves to be assessed on its merits. It's a sad indictment on front-end that building something good is no longer good enough to get recognition.

HTMX is cool, but it's honestly only in the conversation because the developer has leveraged memes and garnered popularity on Twitter.

I'm old enough to remember when servers rendered everything and you used CSS and Javascript to enhance the pages after they were rendered. The web is in such a dark and overengineered place. It's almost unbelievable. It's why my approach to building apps is server-rendered first and then enhanced after the fact.

One of these posts. Dig into the numbers and claims, and you'll see that they're not building something anywhere near Twitter scale.

I've been working with Web Components a bit lately and was pleasantly surprised to see Lit had some similarities to Aurelia. Nothing really comes close to Aurelia, which is surprising given it has one of the better developer experiences.

The syntax and overall paradigm of Aurelia 2 is the same. The team avoided where possible a repeat of what Angular did to the community with the transition to Angular 2. Most notable differences are routing and dynamic composition.

There is a build system free version documented here. Is this what you mean? https://docs.aurelia.io/developer-guides/cheat-sheet#script-...

If you need any help porting it over, just let me know.

These are all Aurelia 1 concerns which have been fixed in Aurelia 2.

- There is no dirty-checking in Aurelia 2. The observation system now uses proxies and other sensible fall-back strategies. The computed decorator for getters is also gone in v2, meaning no accidental vectors for dirty-checking.

- Observation system was rebuilt to use many of the same strategies detailed in point one. No dirty checking and proxy-first. Similarly, your next point about mutations, also has been addressed by the new binding system.

- Many of the templating bugs people encountered were spec implementation issues due to how the browser interprets template tags and content inside them. There were a few repeater bugs, but the ones outside of non-spec compliance haven't been a problem in years and do not exist in Aurelia 2.

- You can write type-safe templates now.

- You have have conditional slots now if you use the new au-slot element. A lot of the slot limitations in Aurelia 1 were because Aurelia adhered to the Web Components spec for how slots worked. In v2 there is still slot, but a new au-slot has been introduced to allow you to do dynamic slots, spot replacement, detect if slots are defined or contain content.

It's important to realise Aurelia 1 was released in 2015, so it's not perfect and some design decisions reflected the state of the web and browser limitations at the time. Aurelia beat out React in a lot of benchmarks back in the day. I'm sure Aurelia 1 vs React has slipped, but Aurelia was one of the faster options for a while, especially in re-rendering performance. You should give v2 a look. It improves upon v1 in every single way.

A lot of the React fanatics are in denial about this. But, I've seen some absolute messes. Does anyone remember InVision? You probably have forgotten about them because Figma and other design tools ate their lunch, but part of their failure and delay in InVision Studio being released was in part because of React. I know other companies have encountered limitations with React and had to hack around them, most notably Atlassian who had to break their app up into apps (essentially parts of the app were smaller apps) because they wanted to use state management for everything and the memory problems were astronomical.

React got popular because at the time, Angular.js was the framework of choice and we can all agree Angular had some serious problems like the digest cycle and performance issues working with large collections. React in comparison to Angular was a breath of fresh air, but in 2023 there are far better choices now than React.

The thing is, React started out as just a view library and the community are to blame for how terrible it has become. How many state management libraries have there been? How many router packages? Devs think they want a library, they actually want a framework. It's why the most popular uses of React are not vanilla React, they're frameworks like Next.js. Also, when you compare the performance of React to other libraries and frameworks, you realise it's one of the worse performing options. It's slow. The whole entire notion of Virtual DOM was groundbreaking in 2013, but in 2023, reactive binding approaches like those taken in Aurelia and Svelte are far superior and better performing.

Has anyone ever seen a large-scale React project that is just using vanilla React? I've seen a few large-scale React codebases and many of them were a tangled spaghetti mess. It gets to a point where React's lack of opinions and standards for even the most basic of things mean you can see the same thing implemented 100 times in the React community.

I have been working with Aurelia 2 (https://docs.aurelia.io) and I love it. It's intuitive, it's fast, the developer experience is great, it comes with all of the needed dependendencies you need like a router, validation, localisation and whatnot. No need to go building a faux-framework of Node packages bloating your app. I've also been working with Web Components, which are in a really good place now too and getting better with each proposal (there are a few good WC proposals in the works right now).

React is anti-standards, it's anti-developer and it's bad for the platform. The fact that React is ten years old and doesn't support Web Components still, goes to show just how little the React team cares about Web Standards. I know jQuery is a bit of a meme now, but at least jQuery helped shape modern standards. Has anything good come from React?

The real solution is Web Components.

In my experience, ChatGPT and Copilot are just cutting out the middle step of a process developers have followed since the internet made problem solving more democratic. ChatGPT and Copilot are effectively StackOverflow, except faster. Right now, you still need to be an experienced developer to spot the hallucinations, but I see AI as a tool, not a replacement.

I remember developers were saying similar things about how jQuery was going to make developers lazy because they weren't writing manual queries and Javascript code (especially for things like XMLHttpRequest) and it just made developers more efficient. People said the same thing about Ruby on Rails, how it allowed developers to work with Ruby without having to really know Ruby. The same thing for database ORM's. Developers decried they would make developers lazy and not know how to write manual database queries.

A submarine made out of carbon fibre material built by a company that openly bragged about using off the shell components to reduce costs and fired its director of marine operations for voicing concerns over safety, cutting corners. Say it ain't so? Despite James Cameron being known for his films, people forget he's been actively involved in the development of deep sea submersibles. He's been to the Titanic wreckage site more times than most. Paul-Henri Nargeolet who tragically died on this experimental sub has made 35 trips, Cameron has made 33.

It's not even an accusation at this point, it's the truth. And Cameron is more knowledgeable about this subject than most.

Yes. But, that doesn't mean implementing these things is any easier. Maybe if you're sliding an element in and out, the WebAnimations API would suffice. If you're wanting to do advanced animation, you will end up creating your own library. With anime.js, you have better control over your animations. You can pause, play, reverse, and seek animations, as well as control their speed. It provides a powerful timeline feature which allows you to chain animations and control their sequence, something that is not available in the Web Animations API. You can also do things like line drawing and morphing, as well as animate CSS properties, SVG, DOM attributes and JavaScript Objects.

You can do most things natively, if you have the time and luxury of reinventing the wheel.