> You do that for 10.5 years and you reach the center of the milky way

But that would be pretty pointless without taking the time to decelerate :)

Infinity project (game) https://gamedev.net/blogs/entry/2262302-a-retrospective-on-t... started in 2004. It's not the same exact game, but the developer seems to work on something similar: https://www.inovaestudios.com/Battlescape The journal / blog is very interesting btw.

> You can always become better in your field, but becoming a better human is a lot harder.

This sounds so self-gratifying. You could have also written: "I am better than Steve Jobs and I look down on him".

It can also be taken as an attack on the cult of personality surrounding Jobs.

Warning: The site has a Bitcoin miner or some nasty ads that use all CPU.

Wait until Cyber Resilience Act kicks in.

This has been my experience on a recent small project for a client. I took effort to understand and prepare the spec before feeding it to Claude Opus. Yet, the result was slop full of defects, and one that I did not understand well at that. I just did not have a mental model of it. I just thought, there's no way I could ever feel confident about this code, something is missing. It did not take me long to write the important parts myself, from scratch and develop that mental model.

Then I would use Claude to make a small fix, write a unit test (write a unit test, not suggest what they unit test should be) or write some less important UI code. It just felt like old school development, with some assistance. I think we may see a shift back to a "copilot" mode and by the way, I still use GitHub Copilot. The $19 subscription includes $30 worth of credits and the autocomplete in VS code that uses some cheap model is completely free. This autocomplete is very good and I would like the market to focus more on IDE integrations. The agentic thing is either ahead of its time or it will never have time. Time will tell. I think the LLM can only be as good as the training data, so it will always excel at small chunks, but to implement entire projects of which there's such variety, I would question that. And also, how using it to implement entire projects means the developer does not hold the program model in the mind, which leads to more issues long term.

By the way, in this way of working, I see no difference between Sonnet and Opus. Sonnet is good enough to use as an aid.

> I just assumed that readonly properties will always be pretty performant in general.

This is also the case for variables. var is faster than const, because for const (and let) the engine must do additional work (related to enforcing block-level scope, if I am not mistaken).

To my understanding today it depends on the JS engine and more importantly what JIT stage that code is in. JITs optimize const/let in ways that they can't optimize var now.

Which is to say that if someone tells you that you should in general never use const/let for "performance" they are probably wrong, but yes there probably are still edge cases and microbenchmarks that make var look faster on some engines.

I thought this would be about AI slop.

How well can it run GLM 5.2?