Wouldn't a re-implementation be akin to 'heres how it works, write the code' rather than 'heres the code, redo it in rust'?

Code review tool that breaks up diffs and regroups fragments based on runtime execution paths and/or architectural boundaries. I find it useful sometimes to see changes organised that way.

Can you share it? Would love to try it out! github/linkedin: adityamwagh

Didn't work for me even when I chose to see the desktop site in my mobile browser :/

it is based off a minimum pixel as of now, apologies.

the overall reason why we didn't ship a mobile site is that code is inherently very hard to read on mobile

and i think to do that properly, you have to design explicitly for it. (and that is not, in fact, something that i do want to vibe code)

At least it would be reasonable to show a message like "Sorry, no mobile support yet".

As a banner or something, maybe. But I'd much rather see a broken-looking site on mobile than see nothing at all on mobile.

In the same category: websites that display nothing but a splash screen "This site requires Internet Explorer X" or whatever. Don't nanny me, just feed my browser the HTML! Whether my browser can render it properly is my problem, not yours.

It's pretty easy to see what that does though, even if it is shorter. Wouldn't the other approach be more obfuscated?

I type somewhere, nothing appears

Wonder if that's to do with dark mode or something? I had the same issue in dark mode on mobile on duckduckgo.

they've also still got their storage stuff. I always wondered why that isn't doing better, it seemed pretty damn good when I've ended up working iwth it.

Are LLM's really doing the scraping?

Wont this just be non-intelligently scraped, stored, and then fed into the training dataset?

I mean, who's scrping all this stuff and then running inference across it at the kind of scales this implies?

This is for agents such as Openclaw.

And lots of enthusiasts

5318008 ftfy ;)

Alas, the only ones I'll see are my own (who am I kidding I'm flat as fuck)

I wonder what happens if you ask Claude to solve the problem, and don't review it's answer properly..

they're just holding it wrong.. what model are they using? they should make sure they're on Opus 4.5+. That was a stepwise improvement and was when AI coding clearly became the futureₖₑₖ

They could easily have read it, and thought , that communicates the information that it needs to.

No point creating busywork for yourself just shuffling words around when the information is there, no?

I guess it depends on what you want out of the article. Substance, or style?

> They could easily have read it, and thought , that communicates the information that it needs to.

I'd they aren't self-aware enough or smart enough to determine that what they wrote is indistinguishable from text generation, how probable is it that they have something of value to add to any thought?