WebComponents do their job with little-to-no fuss, and they're universally available.

I haven't used deepseek for anything else but the above results make me question its overall capability. Meanwhile qwen3.8 has continued to impress.

Astra found a number of flaws that would have come up during implementation and we worked through them. But then I had Fable 5.1 review that document and it found a number of issues with Astra's changes, the least of which had was that Astra duplicated a lot of technical notions that it added rather than using references to an authoritative section. It also flagged some of Astra's designs as technically impossible, pointing out why and I'm actually in the process of digesting its feedback and updating the design spec. (I hand-review each point and we work through a solution together -- I don't trust either model to come up with something that follows my vision on their own)

I'm not promoting one or the other, I just found it interesting how this sort of adversarial review found pretty significant flaws in the other model's work. I am curious as to whether this process will eventually converge on a document that both agree on or if the models are going to perpetually nitpick each other.

I haven't actually started implementation yet, so maybe one or the other is full of shit. Just trying to come up with an architecturally sound design for something I want to write, when I lack the DSP knowledge to be able to write it myself. But the intent is to pass an agent the design doc and list of milestones and let it handle implementation.

It would be useful to be able to generate backing vocals/hums/melismas and whatnot, that could be plugged into a DAW.

You have people pumping out an entire album in a few days simply because they can, repeatedly, and then they flood streaming services with their garbage. I forget which network it was but as of a few months ago, AI-generated submissions were at least half of all submissions.

And I think this does mirror the situation with LLMs -- you need this whole computer contraption and GPU, also running on electricity, to support the LLM's "thought" processes. And that if we model the brain's neurology sufficiently (which it seems we've done) we can achieve results that appear to be like thinking, even if it is an emergent behavior from "relatively" simple math.

Which actually makes me wonder the opposite -- are we, as humans, not much better than these LLMs? Suppose the body is just that super complicated computer contraption, honed by thousands/millions of years of evolution to achieve some semblance of homeostasis? If you reject the idea that we have a soul, we start to look very similar to the machines we build. "You are a brain inside a skull cockpit, piloting a bone mech covered in meat armor and skin" feels more and more relevant. That I'm just a meat circuit running brain chips and once you pull the plug on the source of electricity it all just... stops

A little bit of depth to go with all that breadth?

I'm not saying there aren't deep systems in NMS. Its just that they are sparse. You can tool around all day having only the most cursory interactions with most of the game's systems. They've added so many interesting things, yet last time I played it felt there wasn't much of anything to do with them. For example, the Pokemon clone they added a few updates ago -- fun for five minutes. Super simple battles. However many months of development for something that got old after 5 minutes.

https://burningman.org/about-us/10-principles/ -- "Decommodification" is the most important one to keep in mind, particularly with this audience, as I imagine some here would have trouble not trying to productify/commodify everything