ddkto

The best part is that copilot commented on the PR saying that this doesn’t actually change the behaviour, creates inconsistency in the codebase and suggested reverting the change! (This comment seems to have been ignored…)

> The configuration schema default was changed to "all", but the runtime fallback in extensions/git/src/repository.ts still calls config.get('addAICoAuthor', 'off'). This is now out of sync and can lead to unexpected behavior in contexts where the contributed configuration defaults aren't loaded (e.g., some tests/hosts), and it makes the intended default unclear. Update the runtime fallback to match the schema default (or omit the fallback so the contributed default is used).

The example usda data has a prim named `…_fbx` which suggests that maybe the original author uploaded an FBX file, and skechfab converted it to USD.

If sketchfab is converting the file format, it’s not so surprising that they get into the internals of the file.

This is basically what the OP is doing - just think of this of the cursor rule as a summary (aka a compression) of the session.

I did something similar for a small vibe-coded app. After a few back and forths to develop the first working version, I asked the LLM summarize the requirements and state of the app so far. I saved that summary into a `description.md` file, and can include it in a fresh conversation.

I was using simonw's llm so adding a new feature or making a change looks like:

`llm -f description.md -f code.py "Instructions for making another change."`

Yes, but Bilbo does adopt him to make him his heir

The short answer is no, it is much more than that!

The long answer involves several hundreds of years of history…

> Maple syrup is a minor luxury, easily substituted by other things like jam or honey.

Speaking as a Canadian, I suppose this is maybe technically true from an economic standpoint, but…we don’t even accept table syrup as a substitute, much less honey or jam.

(and I’ll bet IHOP serves table, not maple, syrup…)

Yeah, the flip side of there being 'less skilled' developers who operate at a higher level of abstraction is that it is easier to train more of them.

In absolute numbers, there are probably more people today who understand the fundamentals of computer hardware then there were 40 years ago, but it's a much smaller percentage of all the computing professionals.

Simon Wardley would like a word…in his model this is the natural order of things. As technology matures and standardized and a new generation of tools is built on top of new abstractions, and the details of that tech no longer need to be understood in order to use it.

Subjects and skills that were requisite basics a generation* ago, become advanced, under the hood topics for specialists. The next generation of people need different skills in the day to day.

This post is a great account of what that feels like from the inside, from the perspective of the newer generation learning these (now) ‘advanced’ topics.

(Funnily enough, I don’t (yet) see anyone commenting "real men write assembler" - a skill that has long ago moved from required by all developers to super-specialized and not particularly useful to most people.)

*I am using the word generation in the broadest sense as it relates to cycles of technology