MGriisser

"And here’s the absurd part: that history exists."

"It’s a jigsaw puzzle where the manufacturer had the original picture, cut it up, mailed me the pieces one at a time, lost a few in the post, mailed some twice, and printed nothing on the box."

"and that’s the entire problem: nothing announces a gap."

"None of this is any provider’s bug. Their webhooks work exactly as documented. The problem is what a webhook is: a notification, “something happened, here’s a POST about it.”"

Almost this entire section is clearly written by an LLM

Sam Altman not being consistently candid or truthful would be the shock of the century.

(I'm not sure if this still holds under a world where LLMs are doing the majority of writing code but this is my opinion from prior to LLMs)

From someone who has worked mostly in Ruby (but also Perl and TypeScript and Elixir) I think for web development, a dynamic language with optional types actually hits maybe the best point for developer productivity IMO.

Without any types in a dynamic language, you often end up with code that can be quite difficult to understand what kinds of objects are represented by a given variable. Especially in older poorly factored codebases where there are often many variations of classes with similar names and often closely related functions it can feel almost impossible until you're really familiar with the codebase.

With an actual fully typed language you're much more constrained in terms of what idioms you can use and how you can express and handle code by the type system. If you're not adept or knowledgeable about these things you can spend a lot of time trying to jam what you're attempting into the type system only to eventually realize it's impossible to do.

A gradual type system on top of a dynamic language gets you some of the best of both worlds. A huge amount of the value is just getting typing at function boundaries (what are the types of the arguments for this function? what is the type of what it's returning?) but at the same time it's extremely easy to just sidestep the type system if it can't express what you want or is too cumbersome.

Unfortunately I don't do anything nearly that sophisticated, I honestly barely even know Elixir, I had just used it a little bit at a previous job and thought it would be a nice choice to try for the web server part of an application I was building.

I mostly use Claude in that repo for controllers, DB access, and front end via heex templates, often with LiveView. I find it can get a bit mixed up with heex stuff occasionally given the weirdness of nested code into the HTML and all that but I think on pure Elixir it usually does a good job.

I personally find Claude Code has no real issues working and producing code in the 40k LoC Ruby on Rails repo I work in nor in the 45k LoC Elixir/Phoenix repo I work in. For the last few months I'd say 99% of all changes I do to both are purely via Claude Code, I almost never use my editor anymore at all. It's common things don't work on the first try or aren't exactly what I want but usually just giving an error to Claude or further instructions will fix it in an iteration or two.

I think the code organization isn't amazing, but it's fine and frankly not that much of a concern to me usually as I'm usually just reading diffs and not digging around in the code much myself.

Is R2 subject to Cloudflare's universal API rate limit? They have an API rate limit of 1200 requests/5 minutes that I've hit many times with their images product.

And they won't increase it unless you become an enterprise customer in which case they'll generously double it.

It seems pretty premature to say that mortgage interest rates that happened barely over a year ago won't happen for a few decades.

You could have looked at interest rates below 3.5% in 2013 and said the exact same thing; that was the lowest interest rate in over 40 years!