#dither-demo img.dithered {
    filter: url(#dither) grayscale(1);
  }

Plenty of us here can conceive, design, architect, build, ship and own things from soup to nuts, and feel a lot more invested in the result as a consequence.

If the compensation is good, and it feels less shackled and less bureaucratic, is that necessarily a bad thing?

For practical, casual use with non-tech users (likely on cellular or not the same network), you do need an internet connection though (you can make a temporary "room" that you both join to then facilitate the transfers), and the caveat there is that method transfers slower than if you're on the same WiFi.

It's basically "we have McDonald's at home.." for file transfers lol, but I use it all the time!

[0] https://pairdrop.net

I guess I'm in the Lefsetz School of Thought [0][1] about it all (and I know, he's a polarizing personality, so I get it when people think he's full of shit), but I also think that two things can be right at the same time (Rapino and gang are criminals, ticket prices cost a lot because that's what they cost)

Maybe I'm wrong! I don't have much skin in this game man, I just personally find that his takes mirror what I see happening in real life to friends and colleagues who are artists, promoters and venue operators.

[0] https://lefsetz.com/wordpress/2026/04/20/capping-resale/

[1] https://lefsetz.com/wordpress/2026/04/15/live-nation-loses/

Considering all of that, everybody in the chain prefers and benefits from sold-out shows for myriad reasons, and all live performance is theatre at its core anyways, so IMO what's a little extra theatre on top to make sure the shows go on in this year of our Lord 2026, where very little is cheap and affordable?

[0] https://storybook.js.org

As always, YMMV!

[0] https://github.com/SnakeO/claude-co-commands

The main reason is because if there's a significant bug or large optimization going on, that shit needs to be done, tested and merged before building more stuff on top, otherwise you run the risk of wasted time, tokens and effort having a bunch of parallel work running that may not end up compatible at the end.

Lately I've had a lot more success having Claude generate a plan, send the plan to Codex for co-validation/amendments, have Claude implement the plan, then have Codex PR review the commit (and likely make some edits of its own), then I test out the code/changes.

Meanwhile, my actual management of what I'm asking them to do is just a text file in Notepad where I'll write like BUG: xyz thing does abc or IDEA: let's change this to that as I'm testing in-app, with the actual code opened in Notepad++ tabs (lol feel free to roast me, I'm in front of 2 screens, one Windows (primary), one Mac (to the right), sharing keyboard and mouse -- LLMs are 99% on the Mac, planning/testing/verification/manual coding/graphic design on Windows, committing and pushing to a repo both machines have checked out)

I haven't yet found a scenario where many Claudes and many Codexes running simultaneously on 35 concurrent features makes any sense, but I'd definitely encourage people to try multi-model cooperation since they all seem to have different sensibilities. I haven't made much use of Gemini in this context though because two's company, three's a crowd. YMMV.

Just off the top of my head as I briefly scan shit sitting on the shelves of my office:

- Joe Dirt

- Death Wish 3

- Thrashin

- Hackers

- Mortal Kombat

- Uncle Buck

- The Incredible Burt Wonderstone

- Tapeheads

- Prayer of the Rollerboys

- Weekend at Bernie's

Not exactly Fellini, and some are barely even Andy Sidaris if we're being honest, but every movie in that list is amazing for different reasons. An objective critique of any of them (especially in context with "film", as a shapeless, vague concept) misses the point and the spirit of each and every one. But I am an uncultured heathen, so ...

Project Hail Mary isn’t Arrival, it’s ET mixed with Castaway. It’s about friendship and loneliness and the fragility of the human experience and the triumph of the human spirit!

Normally I’d just say “you didn’t get it, it wasn’t for you” but given the insufferable and total dismissal above, I’d wager it actually IS for you LOL but you chose not to receive the message.

Anyways, everybody’s a critic these days, I get that. I’d just encourage people to soften a bit and appreciate things for what they are (not what we want them to be)

~18 months ago a friend of mine had a very viable, good idea for a physical product, but very fuzzy on the details of where to begin. My skillset backfilled everything he was missing to go from idea to reality to in-market.

I began at arm's length with just advice and validation, then slowly got involved with CAD and prototyping to make sure it kept moving forward, then infrastructure/admin, graphic design, digital marketing and support, etc, while he worked on manufacturing, physical marketing, networking, fulfillment, sales, etc.

Long story short, because I both deeply believe in the vision and know that teamwork makes the dream work, I am fully, completely, inextricably involved LOL -- and I don't have a single complaint about it either, but man, watch out, because if you don't believe in the vision but do have skills/expertise they're lacking, and opt out, friends and family will be the quickest and most aggrieved people you'll ever meet that think you're gatekeeping them from success.

Chatting with professors after class or attending office hours might be a grift, but it's not necessarily unfair. Specific circumstances aside, anybody can do it to get some leverage.

As an American, Claude feels much more natural to me, with the same overly-optimistic "move fast, break things" ethos that permeates our culture. It takes bigger swings (and misses) at harder-to-quantify concepts than Codex, cuts corners (not intentionally, but it feels like a human who's just moving too fast to see the forest for the trees in the moment), etc. Codex on the other hand feels more grounded, more prone to trying to aggregate blind spots, edge cases, and cover the request more thoroughly than Claude. It's far more pedantic and efficient, almost humorless. The dude also claimed that most of the Codex team is European while Claude team is American, and suggested that as an influence on why this might be.

Anyways, I've found that if I force Claude and Codex to talk to each other, I can get way better results and consistency by using Claude to generate fairly good plans from my detailed requests that it passes to Codex for review and amendment, Claude incorporates the feedback and implements the code, then Codex reviews the commit and patches anything Claude misses. Best of both worlds. YMMV