They are absolutely different. An LLM can be paused and pick back up in the exact same place. It makes no difference if compilation take a second or an hour. A human has to remember what they were doing. That's what people talk about when they mention flow state.

> Besides, you're just ignoring the main talking point of my comment - the state

I don't think I ignored that, I talk about it directly. I said it could conceivably lead to more problems because the LLM could overly lean on live evaluation as context degrades. I would feel more comfortable with it in an immutable language.

> programmer/agent stops guessing

I think programmers and agents are fundamentally different, and require different approaches. I don't see the benefits to an agent avoiding recompilation when they may take 30+ minutes on a couple prompts. I don't think compilation time even accounts for 1% of what my agents do, but I could be wrong (again, I'm not working on something massive).

I also don't think I want them to assume they solved something because the current image is working as intended. I don't really trust them to know if they have a working solution, or if they have built up a very specific state that works, but can't get the same solution from scratch.

Also I feel more comfortable doing localized tests through the REPL than letting an agent do it. I would need some kind of test suite or harness to check a bigger trail of behavior than let it assume a problem was fixed. But I doubt this will be a problem for long

The article doesn't mention this at all. It just blindly includes that graph and than muses about the death of Jetbrains for a few paragraphs.

Is this really a problem with agentic programming? I have done some pretty complex tasks with it and I never thought "this would go a lot faster if the compilation speeds weren't slow." Seems like the time Claude takes dwarfs any build time.

I am not working on 1M+ LOC codebases though, so I could see how slow compilation times could be a problem then, but I imagine the agentic part would also slow down.

> Feels bad to buy an expensive piece of hardware, a $60+ game, and then be asked to pony up another hourly fee

That's why people were confused. You made it sound like you couldn't use your hardware to play games. Why are you streaming from cloud PCs in the first place if you have the hardware?

Okay, here he is doing just that. Didn't watch it, tries to weigh in on it for clout. His own comment section is not having it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1ubB8tjL04.

> I very much doubt he calls every woman lead a diversity hire. I think you are overreacting and putting him in the chuds tribe you are already very opinionated about.

You don't have to take that literally. He wears kid gloves for male actors. He takes on a different tone when talking about women.

> I think you are overreacting and putting him in the chuds tribe you are already very opinionated about.

I didn't call him a chud, you're just inventing stuff now. But it's definitely easy to see who butters his bread.

In his Sydney Sweeney video, which is a pretty bad video in general because it doesn't engage at all with why people might not like her, he has a very long rant (for him) about liberal women and how broken they are. How they've been corrupted by college and they're just secretly jealous of beautiful women. Just empty ranting full of every stereotype he could pull out of a hat. He doesn't respond to the fact that it's a gambling ad at all, which a huge amount of people criticized. He boils everything down to "She's hot and women hate that." He doesn't even think it's worth mentioning what people actually said. He posts a bunch of completely unrelated studies to the point he is making.

Then he, for whatever reason, attacks the interviewer that asked Sydney about the American Eagle ad? Implying she's a secret liberal placed there to make her look bad? Even though she gave her the most softball questions possible. Like, I think anybody can understand this is an interviewer giving a person a chance to react to news. Why is he just seeing a woman and implying she's secretly seething with anger? It's an extremely creepy way to talk about people. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DlVovsQQGdk

AI is quite good at finding vulnerabilities, but it's been rough for patching them. The old adage "defenders have to be right every time, attackers only have to be right once" applies to AI security patches.

That is a very tired thing to say. You don't need to look that hard to see how untrue this is. Take a brief glance at his twitter or his communities and you'll see how much of a "character" it is. They barely even talk about media anymore. They post the same gender war slop shit that bots are posting all over Reddit right now. Critical Drinker takes a bit of a "boiling the frog" approach to his content and his true character isn't obvious on a few listens.

> I am not a fan of him and don't like the culture war stuff

You are likely underestimating how much he does it now. It's night and day different from his earlier work. He was a ghost writer for James Patterson. He knows how to follow the money. He's essentially a parody of himself now.

> and he has much valid criticism of films/games where he highlights how badly written many of them are

I don't think such a vague and easy to defend criticism is worth handwaving the substance of the channel. People have been pointing and laughing at video game writing for 30 years. That's an uncontroversial vague post. And that is the best you're going to get from him, because he rarely talks about games or films in a specific way, he usually just copy pastes the same beat for beat plot complaints that better critics have, and putting an anti woke slant on it. Sometimes he reviews shit he hasn't even seen or played because he wants to get in on the discussion.

> He has a huge fan base on YouTube. You don't get that by being dull or not having any valid criticisms. You are way off base

Huh? Sure you do, if it has morphed from entertainment to outrage bait. That is dull, and profitable in the algorithm age. Are you under the impression cynical, lazy pop posting cannot survive on Youtube?

> I would imagine he has a more diverse audience than you would expect

I don't recall saying his audience wasn't diverse, I said his fans often don't play video games. So it's annoying to see people that don't play video games weigh in on the problems with the industry. It's nakedly obvious to the people that have grown up loving games when they are talking to a person who has just engaged with outrage content over the medium and not actually held a controller.

> A lot of people like watching people shit on popular media. Cinemasins was doing the exact same thing a decade ago

Ooph. That's exactly my point, though. Cinemasins is the kind of low brow film criticism that people who enjoy film will despise. It's pop entertainment, which is harmless, but there are 1,000 more interesting channels that can talk about film and are still entertaining. So when someone comes into a film space and you can tell they are just regurgitating Cinemasins videos, it's pretty clear they are not film watchers.

The difference is Critical Drinker has leaned heavily into the culture war stuff and has convinced a legion of fans that the reason everything is bad is down to a bunch of easily violated wokeness rules. I don't necessarily like the movies he dislikes, but the conclusions he comes to and the audience he caters to moronically shove the same 4 woke buttons into any media discussion, ad infinitum. It's extremely reactionary content. Every woman lead is a diversity hire, but every male lead in a bad movie is just an "unfortunate miss." Everything "woke" is going to fail, except whoops, for all of those things that were wildly successful, those are actually not woke anymore. It's just a channel that actively diverts discussion away from actual criticism, and makes it about algorithmically pleasing political content.

One of the funniest things I see is when Critical Drinker fans want us to return to non-woke franchises like...Metal Gear Solid. Maybe the gayest franchise of all time. A game where woke writers weren't trying to humiliate men! Except you're actually disarmed and ass kicked by your surrogate mother like 40 times.

I've also learned a lot of people who listen to him don't play games to begin with and are usually just larping. It is what it is.

Sounds like a horrible existence. Might as well listen to a cheese grater.

Why is word circulating that you can just sign up for Cloudflare and be 100% protected from this? They are burying the leed and trying to get new customers, and it's working.

Amazingly, AWS Linux has not been patched yet.

I have not seen confirmation Cloudflare is doing anything except playing whack a mole with certain request patterns. PHP Core Devs have been clear you need to upgrade. If this is true, it's disgustingly opportunistic that Cloudflare is using this critical security time to lie to people that they are safe.

Anyone from Cloudflare want to speak to this?