You could say that 'the artist' guided the genai to show creativity, ai is just a tool, and maybe the process helped improve their drawing skills.

Yes, I agree. It's just... maybe it's because I won't be amazed by coding challenge posts anymore like I used to, just like I'm not excited about hobby coding projects these days.

I literally said that "I'm just having hard time accepting it."

> And why are you implying that using AI does not improve those skills?

I'm not.

...when did I ever said that?

To me these little challenges are about improving programming skills, showing creativity, and mostly just for fun. So using LLMs on 'codevember' feels weird. That doesn't mean I'm blaming him for it, I'm just having a hard time accepting it.

[0]: https://x.com/mrdoob/status/2117561239249518650

Pdf preview doesn't work on GitHub.

* As long as it works

You must read the code before shipping it to production.

"But I don't have time!" That's not even an excuse. At least one person in your company should be able to explain the code! How would you answer when reviewer asks why did you use this very algorithm?

"We have tests." They could help. But don't rely on them entirely because there's a high possibility that the tests are wrong.

I can't believe how many people proudly admit that they don't read code. I'm not entirely against using LLMs to write or review code, but not even trying to read it should be prohibited. Someone responsible have to review it.

Edit: I know that LLMs are very good at writing code these days. My point is that this is less a matter of quality and more a matter of responsibility.

Isn't this the most basic function of a video player?

Also, it's funny that a site with only one chatbot to have this amazing domain.

- Retro torus: wrong z index.

- Wireframe globe: Has wrong projection.

- I, Robot polygons: Looks too different from the actual game.

- Wolfenstein raycaster: wasd moves to wrong direction.

- PS1 affine warp: Shows a glitched plane.

- Utah teapot: Also wrong z index, and what is this?? This must be the worst Utah teapot ever created.

- Glenz vectors: Also wrong projection.

- Penrose tiling: Might a nitpick, but why can I drag to pan? It's not like you can zoom.

- Spaghetti vortex: This says it's from 2026, so not a retro? And the thumbnail shows UI(that I can't interact) only.

It makes me sad to see these projects...

Also the descriptions are too vague. For example, what does "GL workstation · 1993" mean? How about "Metaballs · 1995"? "IRIX · 1994"? I tried to find the original renders but I couldn't.

This is the reason you should not reomve your commit history. How would anyone know that there were V1, and it was already popular?

If you need to remove sensitive data, you should use tools like git-filter-repo.

- https://docs.github.com/en/authentication/keeping-your-accou...

- https://github.com/newren/git-filter-repo

- fstar: 2K issues, stars-issue ratio: 0.6.

- coalton: 700 issues, ratio: 0.4

- carp: 450 issues, ratio: 0.08

- c3: 1.9K issues. ratio: 0.3

Bend has 300 issues for 20K stars so ratio is about 0.02. Maybe their followers starred the repo as a fan activity? It could explain too many stars and too few forks/issues/prs.

Compared to other programming languages:

- Gleam: 22K stars, 1K forks, 3K issues

- V: 38K stars, 2.3K forks, 11K issues

- Ruby: 23K stars, 5.6 forks, 19K issues

- Zig: 43K stars, 3K forks, 14K issues

It got 16K stars just in 4 months too. https://www.star-history.com/?repos=bendlang%2Fbend

Also how would anyone trust this? I've never seen a programming language that doesn't have 1) changelogs 2) way to download older versions 3) commit history.

I don't understand why the author thought deleting the commit history was a good idea. Imagine seeing this project for the first time. It's a repo with 20K stars, but no commits, and suspiciously few issues and PRs. It doesn't look legitimate.

---

I'm not familiar with academic procedures, but a pdf on a repo, written by Fable and has no reviews, doesn't seem like a proper 'paper' to me.

He took every benefits of being frontiers and now he's kicking the ladder.

Also, regarding the incidents: Neither he nor Sam Altman takes responsibility for those incidents. You can't say, "Wow, someone's agent is gone rogue; let's slow down" when you are literally the person in charge. CEOs and researchers will only slow down when they realize that they will face consequences if their LLMs misbehave.

This ad feels like a science fiction, where humans can't do anything without the help of their AI assistants.

- Design a tattoo of my cat

- What hairstyle should I have

- Arrange these flowers

What next? Who should I date? Open the door?