While the article is focused on “low level” bugs, the key insight is that human understanding has limits, and bugs show up when the human is overconfident in their understanding, and unwilling to verify the code by running it on a sample of test cases. This does seem to help explain why “high level” bugs occur, where the reality somehow doesn’t match the assumption. Maybe a dependency is on the wrong version, a global variable isn’t initialized in certain cases, etc.

In a world of LLMs producing code that isn’t always understandable to humans, it does raise the question of how to enforce that AI code is bug free, and maybe forcing coding agents to stick to human abstractions is the missing piece.

Set a timer for 50 minutes…always get a timer for 15.

Time is more valuable than money and unless you have tons of time and space that simulator is just an expensive paperweight.

A simple fix I use for AI writing is disclosing it. Here, a simple note that “this article was translated with AI assistance” would have made it much less distracting.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/eUXWfkm8LVuYMDsc7

And yes of course I’m joking. If you’re spending money on these get rich quick schemes instead of dollar cost averaging into an index fund, you’re being irresponsible. That’s real advice.