vitorsr

Maybe it's an unpopular opinion, but a concise report from one of today's frontier models is not something I would be offended by, even if nobody read it beforehand. I guess the fact that there is a nontrivial cost to it also eases the existential angst of neither being deterministic (Lintian) nor having been produced by a person.

GIS work has very complex inner mechanics that are hard to reason about at a high level without very explicit abstractions to ease the costs and cognitive burden of manual review. Sometimes earlier, longer-lived FOSS projects may have grown organically without the benefit of retrospective appreciation because that path has not been trodden (at least out in the open) at the time.

> u clown

I hate how the Gemini series only responds to outright insult. Same with the Claudes. What is the point of antagonizing the user when he or she offers input. Is it so hard to spend a few "reasoning" tokens to reconcile contradicting evidences. Seems almost like the wrong epistemic posture is altogether imprinted during training. Or undone during alignment, "hardening", whatever. What a time to live in, having to argue with weights.

From memory, the language server appeared to be a second-class citizen, debugging was kind of idiosyncratic, static analysis was poor... but I confess it has been a while since I made a serious effort to use it.

I was particularly frustrated by the promises of composability not translating into practice.

I was also stricken by the same npm/Rust-like pathological dependency trees where I had to pull 200-plus packages for some function.

All I ever wanted from Julia was great a development experience, but it appears to have never quite gotten there.

As a language it has gotten there a long while ago (1.6 LTS series comes to mind).

The landscape has changed substantially since then, and now "ergonomics" has unfortunately taken lower priority due to agent-driven development.

Nevertheless I think everyone should take a page from Go's book, really, language design now should include the default development workflow.

I believe the general phenomenon is metadiscourse and those in specific are signposting constructions.

Most used as a Wikipedia-on-the-fly. Replaces UpToDate and other POC tools NOT professionals operating them.

Nothing wrong with CMOS/APA/MLA dashes, I quite like them but usage in LLM prose has ruined it for me. AP dashes are weird, too much horizontal spacing, looks horrible and can really erode typographic color sometimes. "International" Oxford/Cambridge spaced dashes is nicest.

The funny thing is at both extremes, either none or indiscriminate use of dashes like in TFA, is a canary of "human writing".

People (including comments here) often attribute LLM use to prevalence in training data but it is probably far less common in the wild than we are led to believe, the more likely scenario is that whatever text-to-text normalization tools used ended up inserting whatever their idiosyncratic typographic styles were.

What caught my eye was:

            Model  Lines of Code  File Size  Gzip Size 
      GPT-5.6 Sol          1,264    35.5 KB    10.0 KB 
    GPT-5.6 Terra            827    20.0 KB     6.7 KB

I am not sure it is the management consulting partners or their associates that are doing the vibe coding.

The more likely scenario is that they "consume" the output of designated offshore teams.