From my experience, as complexity and size grow, each prompt takes longer, does less, and is prone to more mistakes and disruptions to other parts of the codebase.

You're argument that uninsured are included is just as axiomatic. Zero evidence or sources. I guess we'll agree to disagree.

I'll restate my argument so it's clear: CONCORD-3 does not mention insurance status anywhere in the paper. It does state that the statistics require diagnosis. It's reasonable to assume that if you can't afford healthcare, you're less likely to seek treatment or diagnosis.

You understand that CONCORD-3 is about tracking people who enter the healthcare system. Isn't it reasonable to assume that if healthcare is free or very affordable, there would be higher participation? And on the flipside, if it's outrageously expensive, there would be lower participation?

The second most common cancer is Breast Cancer. The USA is "top-tier" but so is pretty much every other Western Country. Australia, also famously single-payer is a mere 0.4% behind the USA.

This is the only source of modern survival statistics by country:

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5879496/

Compiled into an easier to read format:

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/cancer-su...

Take note of two things: First, some states weren't even included in the study and second, there is no mention of insurance. The statistics are only tracking people who were diagnosed with cancer. It's reasonable to assume that some people who had cancer symptoms did not seek treatment because they didn't have insurance and died without being diagnosed.

I believe a single payer system is a matter of when not if. It works just fine in other countries. In our country, the healthcare industry has evolved into extracting as many dollars as it can from the economy. This is because when someone is sick and needs treatment, healthcare providers hold all of the cards.

Since, I'm assuming you are not a professional game developer, the parallel is speculative and sort of reaching. Therefore, is it feasible to you the author of the blog knows better than you what tools work for his chosen field and that he came to the conclusions he did in good faith?

Unless you yourself are doing commercial game development, calling the author disingenuous puts your own pro-AI bias on display. It’s based on speculation. I prefer to take his very specific examples and experiments at face value.

It doesn't always land on the right person but it's usually a motivating factor for people to make an effort.

If you strip away the hyperbolic statement about compilers and the Empire State Building, it's an internal success anecdote.

Would be interested to hear how all of the self-directed AI decisions worked out after launch. This is where I run into problems with AI. Sometimes it makes product decisions that aren't immediately visible and make no sense and cause serious problems down the road. Also, an analysis of how much time was actually saved by using AI? since it sounds like there was a lot of guidance and testing to make sure what the AI did was correct.

Doing feature development seems to take just as long or productivity gains are modest (where I work at least) and I think the reason is touched on in the article. Most orgs are just terminally bad at building software.

* Person gets angry/frustrated/passionate about some third party tool they could build themselves.

* Person builds that tool. It's not perfect but does what company needs (for now)

* Person gets slaps on the back and congratulations for building such an awesome tool and saving the company loads of money

* Person leaves company

* Nobody else cares anymore and/or wants to bother with the inconvenience of keeping up with bugs and features

* After dealing with this for a period of time, someone says "Hey, why don't we just use third party tool?"

* Company re-subscribes to third party tool

We've all seen people outsourcing their thinking to AI. "Hey Claude, I need bug tracking which product should I use?" Claude then recommends Jira because it's the defacto standard as of 2026. This leads to Jira getting even more popular, leading to subsequent training data keeping it as the defacto standard.

Same issue for development technologies. React/Typescript will never ever go away thanks to coding agents.

Therefore, you should include the actual costs associated with the task in API token usage or subscription level. Is there a reasonable way to do apples to apples cost comparison?

It was literally months of going through various hoops to get approval from the insurance company. When the surgery happened, the surgeon billed $80k for about 2.5 hour surgery. Not sure what the insurance company ultimately paid. That wasn't including the anesthesiologist and the facility fees.

I lived in Australia for five years and when I came home to the USA, I realized that most people here in America are indoctrinated to believe our system (for anything not just healthcare) is better than everyone else’s when it just isn’t true