roetlich

Oh yes, I didn't clarify that I meant an argumentum ad hominem, which isn't the same thing as the informal fallacy of the same name. So yeah, I agree, this isn't directly fallacious.

> if Andrew isn't trying to enter the discussion

But he is. Both in the title, and in later half of the blog post, he directly enters that discussion. I'm not saying an ad hominem argument is always bad, but this clearly is one.

No, the discussion started with a the article from Bun, stating that rust has some technical advantages for them. The response from the Zig creator is a bunch of personal attacks directed at one guy, like calling him a stinky manager. All of these are fully unrelated to which language is better for Bun.

This is like the textbook definition of an ad hominem.

Well, this seems like a very dangerous way of using AI. If you keep pushing until you get back an answer that makes sense to you, you might just get your own believes fed back to you.

Who would have thought that git worktree is the technology of the year 2026?

Great, now we need this with current data for modern governments

Great idea, to include learning into the regular work.

Can you explain how the lessons are generated?

It looks like there are no pre-generated lessons, they are created on the fly by the AI. Wouldn't it be possible to write a skill or similar that does the same with your existing coding agent?

My Firefox doesn't accept your https cert. Maybe check that out?

What does "done offline" mean? Otherwise you are limited by context window.

"Managment" usually are office workers.

> Does it continue if you agree to the warning?

No, you can't "agree".

> What if you ask about 9/11?

It answers the question.

Thanks, will fix! Haven't maintaineed the website in a bit :)