codydkdc

If I'm understanding correctly GitHub Projects solve your concerns with using GitHub Issues

this is a general convention in technical documentation as well

people don't use local editors? it's weird to lock people into workflows like that

I really want Google to launch a Claude Code/OpenAI Codex CLI alternative. also if they included a small VM in one of these subscriptions I'd seriously consider it!

> Firstly, there’s the environmental impact. Models require massive amounts of electricity and water (to cool servers). An AI chatbot contributes more to the climate crisis than a Google search.

I really dislike the "people should be better and use less energy" argument for solving macro-problems like this

> My naive optimism led me to believe that technology would help us fight climate change. I was wrong: AI and Crypto are net negatives in this regard.

...why? why would technology that specifically requires a lot of energy help "fight climate change"?

this entirely article is missing any point to me -- it's very vague and speaking in generalities.

> “If you’re going to use generative tools powered by large language models, don’t pretend you don’t know how your sausage is made.”

why? if you generate code with a LLM, then read and deeply understand the code, what's wrong?

> I can’t help but feel the web would be a better place if the technology had never existed in the first place.

if we didn't invent the wheel, we wouldn't have so many cars/trucks polluting the planet

I'm witnessing...something!

how long is an age?

Herodotus, the famously accurate historian

y is this on the front page

we basically use the same as above, but for reviews. you can use AI to help with reviews, but you're signing off when you approve the PR

this is a bad argument in the abstract. "drivers are fully capable of navigating intersections without Daddy Goverment getting involved" so we shouldn't have traffic laws and stop lights

the evidence says otherwise. I agree an outright ban probably isn't the best solution

the only one of these points I personally care about is:

> The protocol has a very LLM-friendly interface, but not always a human friendly one.

similar to the people asking "why not just use the API directly", I have another question: why not just use the CLI directly? LLMs are trained on natural language. CLIs are an extremely common solution for client/server interactions in a human-readable, human-writeable way (that can be easily traversed down subcommands)

for instance, instead of using the GitHub MCP server, why not just use the `gh` CLI? it's super easy to generate the help and feed it into the LLM, super easy to allow the user to inspect the command before running it, and already provides a sane exposure of the REST APIs. the human and the LLM can work in the same way, using the exact same interface

"more time shorter letter"