Decimal floating-point is also hardware-supported, so it doesn’t carry the same computational overhead it does on platforms where it must be implemented in software.

They are not good at that. The space of possibilities can be massive and LLMs are terrible at exploring such space because they predict from the prior tokens they made. They are inherently bad at exploring new space because it is antithetical to how they work.

To me it's deeply concerning that so many people are getting fooled into thinking that LLMs are actually good at covering their bases like you're describing here. It's one of their weakest qualities.

> Analyze the different ways we can run this software, build a fuzzer, build property tests, and run this software in every scenario possible.

It usually does quite a bad job at this too, often the tests it wrote feel like that of a lazy student that didn't really want to do the task and just sort of cheats at it or does a really shallow job. It certainly cannot run the software in every scenario possible.

> Anyway all of this reads like someone who is not actually using LLMs to build software or hasn't tried them in a while

This is something that is said by everyone who contests anyone pointing out the risks in being overly trusting of AI or otherwise points out their flaws. I use the latest and greatest all the time and all the time I'll point out something that it totally overlooked and get hit with the classic "you're absolutely right". This occurs because I actually read the code and can see the myriad of blatant issues that still occur when using LLMs and know better than to trust them. You will find so many issue by delving into the details.

But yeah, comparing to codex/claude code was a bit silly since those can do way more. It’s closer to the chatGPT. I’m pretty sure 5.6 Luna, not sure exactly since it doesn’t specify Luna/Terra/Sol

Now, the "copilots" integrated in certain Microsoft products can be really horrible. I assume those are some sort of custom models that are not very capable, most of them I consider effectively worthless. But the web chat interface where I can pick chatGPT 5.6 seems fine...

I took a look and honestly the replies were a lot more reasonable than I was expecting them to be. I don't think it's that out of place for people to inform you that the author has been in this space for some time and has prior work to look at (pre-vibe coding era). Really there was one reply citing his prior work, you responded to it calling it a very strange reply and were "very confused" why they would point to his history, even though you had just said things like:

>I'm glad you're having fun vibecoding, and I like that you're interested in this area of research/engineering

To me, it makes sense why someone would say the author has been interested in this area for a long time and pointed you to some prior work that was not vibe-coded, given your comment strongly implies they are just messing around and don't know much about the field.

To be clear, I share much of your feelings in your original comment. I just felt the replies weren't so unreasonable either. At least, I was expecting them to be a lot worse.

You can get great sounding wired iems for very little money, while wireless earbuds are usually pretty pricey for anything not crummy. Cables are indeed annoying, but so is your earbuds being dead because you forgot to charge them. The battery problem gets worse too as they age. If you want reliable, cheap, good sounding music it is pretty hard to beat chi-fi iems.

The way I see it, unless you are specifically going for the "movie" look and take care to work around low fps like videographers do for movies, then higher fps is probably better.

Curious then that you are arguing in favor of a police state with mass surveillance to solve these issues...