terabytest

That’s what the URL links to.

Such a braindead move. You go to the Dia product page and it looks exactly the same as Arc. What’s the point? Just keep improving Arc. I know that back when they originally abandoned Arc, Dia looked like a generic Google Chrome clone with AI stapled on, but I cannot imagine what good reason they had at all to give up Arc and burn their entire user base along the way. I’m not a paying user, so I guess they don’t care about me after all.

Does the sandbox have its own checkout of the repositories you work on? How do you run code review or live editing of the files the LLM is working on?

I’m completely ignorant about this and likely just missing the point but: isn’t the point of an OS to not have to (vibe)code filesystems and networking by hand every time you need them? Also, how does a unikernel cooperate with other applications? Would they all live in separate networked unikernels managed by a hypervisor? And, if they all (vibe)coded their own fs and network wouldn’t that introduce subtle bugs and inconsistencies that would eventually bring the whole thing down and lead you back to the need for shared primitives in the first place?

Maybe a good halfway point is to still have a unikernel but the libraries for common stuff like networking or fs are already written according to a standard and plug and play and reusable across applications?

No, Mois Navon.

You might be talking about the wrong person.

Rabbi Navon should sooner concern himself with a Palestinian’s status as a being with similar inherent rights to dignity or respect, than an LLM’s.

What’s the difference between a law and an integration test?

Sounds like the definition of monarchy?

I apologize if this came across as an attack. I would just say that in a sea of slop, it’s really hard to invest the time it takes to judge the quality of an individual tool, and you might develop heuristics to survive. One useful heuristic is whether the documentation looks written by AI or not, because the level of attention paid to documentation often mirrors what you’d find in terms of software quality. If you want to stand out, you have to look like you’ve invested the time and effort to communicate to your reader that what you wrote is worth their precious time.

At this point, are we sharing these AI-written articles to make fun of how bad they are? Is there any substance left to discuss?

> When the panel proposes a change to the file, the Änderungen prüfen modal opens first.

This is in the first section. If they never bothered to proofread their article, how is it worth the time it takes to read it?

I’m not being facetious. It’s becoming extremely hard to separate the wheat from the chaff. Every piece of software looks and reads like a homogenous pile of Claudisms. Even if the software in question is good, I immediately lose trust in the developer’s good faith when I see stuff like this.

For what it's worth, I would love to read the earlier drafts before the AI workshopped them.

To be clear I’m not making any statement or implication about Ryan’s work or his quality as a developer. As someone who knows nothing about Solid I’m trying to read the article and understand what the USP is and struggling. And remarking on the AI tells in the writing.

As much as I’m trying to understand what’s groundbreaking here, and I’m really trying to appreciate it, the prose style of the article makes it completely impenetrable. I’m trying to understand what makes Solid 2.0 special, but I’m coming up completely empty, because it feels like I’m just reading noise.

Out of curiosity, did you use AI for this reply too? It reads a bit like it.

> I won’t be using AI in this way to create any more web stuff, and I do not use it to anything close to this extent on iOS software. I do ask questions, debug issues, things like that, but I do not create apps with Claude for iOS.

I’m worried this is another lie. “Current,” Terry’s other app, is very obviously built by AI. Its interface carries all the tells (and slop-induced UI bugs) that you’d run into if an app was primarily built through vibe coding. I won’t get into the merits of whether the app works or is useful. I bought it and immediately requested a refund after I noticed all the AI tells.

LLMs are not as cheap on enterprise plans.

Is the issue here a lack of “Reject All” button? Or strictly the number of partners?

This one honestly drives me nuts.

Another issue I had recently is one of the subagents made up a bunch of meaningless jargon and Claude gladly repeated it to me with no definition and completely assuming I was coming along for the ride.

As a EU citizen I’m at a loss for what to do about this. I feel that they’re going against any average citizen’s interest. What can we do to make them stop?

We truly are reaching the end times when an article criticizing the use of LLM is in itself pure AI slop.

You’re suggesting flooding the lungs in order to get a scan?

I have the feeling that this article was hurt rather than helped by being written using LLMs. It was really hard to follow, and even though I read it hoping to learn something new, I left feeling more confused than when I started. The feeling while reading was that the prose was trying to hold my hand but had absolutely no empathy for the build up of my understanding over the article. It’s a bit like when, as a child, you’d do homework with your parent and the parent would start saying “don’t you see how it’s obvious that 25/5=5” with no further explanation and a building tone of frustration.

What is the 3d printing technique being used here? I can’t intuitively recognize it.

Cool! But I'm curious why nobody's gone and published a complete app for multiple platforms? Seems like an obvious next step.

Are there any good end-user apps that are supported on a broad set of platforms and use Iroh to support file transfers between e.g. Windows and iOS seamlessly?

I recommend revisiting this comment when you have a son or daughter.