However, if it helps to move Linux into the mainstream desktop choice. I'm all for it. Obviously I won't be using it any time soon - but if some rich dudes want to throw millions into marketing and getting Linux mainstream, seems like a net positive to me.

"How is it useful? I'm no expert in combustion engines, so I'd hesitate to rely on a slop graphic like this to learn about them as I doubt the creator has any idea about them either."

Notice I say "How is it useful?" and "I'd hesitate to rely on a slop graphic like this to learn".

I think I'm being very obvious about the fact that I can't understand how one would find it "useful" to "learn". Absolutely NOWHERE did I say you can't be entertained by it.

As for useful, I'm genuinely trying to understand HOW you find something useful that may or may not have zero accuracy to the thing in which it's portending to showcase?

When I don't know about something - I would find someone who's really knowledgeable (or a resource that's vetted), and learn from that obviously. I don't want to learn something completely unverified and made up? That makes no logical sense.

Just like my friend's slop graphics. I imagine learning geometry from that and fundamentally locking in incorrect knowledge when there are many thousands of resources that would teach me correctly - this makes no sense right? Would you prefer to learn from the pretty graphics that are teaching you nothing?

It's like a friend - he was like "Look at this awesome set of categorized interactive animations from claude to learn geometry!".

And like 60% of the animations were technically just wrong. Very pretty though, and the effects were cute... I guess...?

I haven't personally seen the research leading me to believe there's a massive new intelligence breakthrough on the horizon but maybe I missed it!

As to the current version - I use AI constantly, as in 12 hours a day 7 days a week specifically for high-end game development. It is currently so far from the 2027 prediction that it's hilarious if you think a little incremental improvement (e.g., like from opus 4.6 to Fable) is going to bring us there.

I hate to say this tbh, I loved hand-writing code. I made a great living for 20 years, and I absolutely loved it and was quite good at it.

Hand-typing code is just slower now; there’s no two-ways about it. You are either going to be slow and a bad hire for businesses, or you figure out how to adopt AI into your workflow to speed up.

One thing I think people don't realize is that deep knowledge of programming, performance, architectural, and domain specific trade-offs makes a skilled engineer about 1000X faster than someone without those skills -with AI. But yes, now unskilled people can actually make apps/software. They just tend to be slow, and their products are full of bugs, security flaws, and abysmal performance.

So we went from: Skills = can or cannot ship any software at all. Now we are at: Skills = can ship better software much faster than unskilled people.

I was actually faced with this recently. I decided to learn Rust and port one of my side projects to it. Initially, I moved extremely slowly, and the AI made truly horrific architectural decisions because I didn't have the knowledge of how to direct it, especially compared to my primary languages.

However, once I gained a firm grasp of Rust, I was better able to properly direct the AI to fix fundamental issues and architect things properly. My speed increase multiplier proved to be directly proportional to my growing knowledge of both the language and the domain.

Skill and knowledge combined with AI, when used appropriately, absolutely multiply your speed and quality. I really think once you understand what AI can do, and how to utilize it to produce better code, faster than before, there truly is no going back.

I'm finding a path forward that I actually enjoy now and don't really see losing my value (no telling how things will change in the future), I can have more time to focus on really quality/solid/performant and useful systems with less time just typing one character out at a time.

You could have talked to me 3 months ago and I'd never imagine I'd say the above btw. I REALLY enjoyed code writing and earlier AI models without harnesses were pretty useless for anyone skilled at development. Now with stuff like deepseek Flash I feel like I have a happy medium of 100% directed/fast code turnaround, less typing, more deep focus on architecture, systems, and the actual end product.

Right now single prompt with Fable can get us a small protype of like 1 game mechanic that's not even remotely production ready. So this guy thinks it'll 100,000X in a year.

AI boosters are something else.

Take this data input and convert it to a Sugiyama-style tree with hand-drawn feeling lines connecting the nodes. We need the ability to activate a random subset of nodes with a paint splash. The whole thing should feel organic, incorporating small motion effects. As the nodes are activated, the edges should look like a hand-drawn painting effect drawing toward the node, and then SPLASH onto the end node as it changes from black to deep red. The background should utilize a muted paper color, and we must adhere to this color palette for all elements (PALETTE).

...then back-and-forth 10 prompts or so to get the prototype I was looking for. Comparing these types of things between Fable and Opus, something like this would be quite a bit less glitchy, prettier, and closer to the quick prototyping I needed than what I got with Opus 4.8.

Now, when I went deep into a complex codebase to fix a small issue or optimization that spanned many files and was fairly unique from anything in the training data, I didn't really see any noticeable difference between Fable and Opus 4.8.

Why do you say it was a lot better, what type of tasks were you testing it on?

--- Make me a threejs game in html. The "game" is where you can tap a button to add a log to a cutting block. You have an axelike (e.g., a stem cube for handle and slim cube for axe blade) object that you can axe into the wood, and wherever the head intersects the underlying "log" cylinder it splits the log.

So blade is a hittest object, where that object hits the spawned log, the log splits, use a decent physics lib (ammoJS is fine) so it feels good. Do you have any questions? ---

After answering about 5 basic questions, the above made a cute little physics based log cutting game very similar to this guy's demo - now it'd probably take about 5-8 more hours to slowly prompt out a more polished version. This stuff is really easy - you don't have to have any experience in game dev to prompt it up.

Kind of curious how other people are using agentic code tools for game dev!