Actual Nielsen Norman Group article here https://www.nngroup.com/articles/liquid-glass/
Can mods change the linked article away from the thin blog post?
Readit NewsCognitiveLens commented on Nielsen Norman Group on iOS 26 usability anderegg.ca/2025/10/12/ni... · Posted by u/ulrischa
CognitiveLens commented on Liquid Glass in the Browser: Refraction with CSS and SVG kube.io/blog/liquid-glass... · Posted by u/Sateeshm
Yeah this site does not scroll like butter as it were.
But I don’t think css can leverage the gpu in most (any?) cases. Apple has almost certainly baked something into the silicon to help handle the ui.
Most browsers will engage the GPU for compositing layers if they think the layers can be separated - https://www.smashingmagazine.com/2016/12/gpu-animation-doing...
I start all my UI projects with this principle, but it's extremely difficult to maintain as screens evolve. I want typography-driven interfaces with structure communicated through headings and spatial grouping, but I usually end up with far more borders and nested padding than I think is "right" as I run into the limits of whitespace as an organizing structure, particularly when the audience has a limited attention span or time to engage.
From experience, borders/cards help communicate conceptual boundaries, while whitespace helps communicate information hierarchy - Gestalt principles don't really address that distinction. For product or data-driven UI where a lot of loosely-related information/topics are shown in discrete parts of the page, cards are effective at high-level grouping. For content-driven UI, whitespace can be sufficient, and I think the article makes this clear.
Other than 'The Ultimate Developer Toolkit' (where type size is more of an issue than the card layout), I actually think the card-based version of each example layout is more compelling - easier to scan, and easier to 'chunk' - despite wanting the typography-and-whitespace alternative to be sufficient.
CognitiveLens commented on Carved stone mask – Pre-pottery, Neolithic B period imj.org.il/en/collections... · Posted by u/webmaven
Every time I see artifacts like these I can’t help but think whether we are producing artifacts that will be discovered 10000 years into the future, and still be in a robust state.
There are definitely projects designed with the specific intent of doing that, e.g. https://longnow.org/clock/
But there are other things, including awesome-and-dangerous nuclear waste sites, with warning messages/symbols designed to last beyond the collapse of modern civilization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-term_nuclear_waste_warnin...
CognitiveLens commented on We shouldn't have needed lockfiles tonsky.me/blog/lockfiles/... · Posted by u/tobr
Yeah, this felt like a gap in the article. You'd have to wait for every package to update from the bottom up before you could update you top levels to remove a risk (or you could patch in place, or override)
But what if all the packages had automatic ci/cd, and libinsecure 0.2.1 is published, libuseful automatically tests a new version of itself that uses 0.2.1, and if it succeeds it publishes a new version. And consumers of libuseful do the same, and so on.
The automatic ci/cd suggestion sounds appealing, but at least in the NPM ecosystem, the depth of those dependencies would mean the top-level dependencies would constantly be incrementing. On the app developer side, it would take a lot of attention to figure when it's important to update top-level dependencies and when it's not.
The article mentions the problem ....
"....Rozells’ composite visually echoes pleas from astronomers, who warn that although satellites collect essential data, the staggering amount filling our skies will only worsen light pollution and our ability to study what lies beyond. Because this industry has little regulation, the problem could go unchecked....."
I realize it's a nit-pick, but that is not at all the common definition of light pollution as it relates to night skies.
CognitiveLens commented on Wasting Inferences with Aider worksonmymachine.substack... · Posted by u/Stwerner
This reads like it could result in "the blind, leading the blind". Unless the Supervisor AI agents are deterministic, it can still be a crapshoot. Given the resources that SourceGraph has, I'm still surprised they missed the most obvious thing, which is "context is king" and we need tooling that can make adding context to LLMs dead simple. Basically, we should be optimizing for the humans in the loop.
Agents have their place for trivial and non-critical fixes/features, but the reality is, unless the agents can act in a deterministic manner across LLMs, you really are coding with a loaded gun. The worst is, agents can really dull your senses over time.
I do believe in a future where we can trust agents 99% of the time, but the reality is, we are not training on the thought process, for this to become a reality. That is, we are not focused on the conversation to code training data. I would say 98% of my code is AI generated, and it is certainly not vibe coding. I don't have a term for it, but I am literally dictating to the LLM what I want done and have it fill in the pieces. Sometimes it misses the mark, sometimes it aligns and sometimes it introduces whole new ideas that I have never thought of, which will lead to a better solution. The instructions that I provide is based on my domain knowledge and I think people are missing the mark when they talk about vibe coding, in a professional context.
Full Disclosure: I'm working on improving the "conversation to code" process, so my opinions are obviously biased, but I strongly believe we need to first focus on better capturing our thought process.
I'm skeptical that we would need determinism in a supervisor in order for it to be useful. I realize it's not exactly analogous, but the current human parallel, with senior/principal/architect-level SWEs reviewing code from less experienced devs (or even similarly-/more-experienced devs) is far from deterministic, but certainly improves quality
Think about how differently a current agent behaves when you say "here is the spec, implement a solution" vs "here is the spec, here is my solution, make refinements" - you get very different output, and I would argue that the 'check my work' approach tends to have better results.
CognitiveLens commented on Wasting Inferences with Aider worksonmymachine.substack... · Posted by u/Stwerner
I think this is an interesting idea, but I also somewhat suspect you've replaced a tedious problem with a harder, more tedious problem.
Take your idea further. Now I've got 100 agents, and 100 PRs, and some small percentage of them are decent. The task went from "implement a feature" to "review 100 PRs and select the best one".
Even assuming you can ditch 50 percent right off the bat as trash... Reviewing 50 potentially buggy implementations of a feature and selecting the best genuinely sounds worse than just writing the solution.
Worse... If you haven't solved the problem before anyways, you're woefully unqualified as a reviewer.
The linked article from Steve Yegge (https://sourcegraph.com/blog/revenge-of-the-junior-developer) provides a 'solution', which he thinks is also imminent - supervisor AI agents, where you might have 100+ coding agents creating PRs, but then a layer of supervisors that are specialized on evaluating quality, and the only PRs that a human being would see would be the 'best', as determined by the supervisor agent layer.
From my experience with AI agents, this feels intuitively possible - current agents seem to be ok (thought not yet 'great') at critiquing solutions, and such supervisor agents could help keep the broader system in alignment.
CognitiveLens commented on The average college student today hilariusbookbinder.substa... · Posted by u/Jyaif
This was written by an Ivy League professor. When can we stop pretending Ivy League students are any better than state school students? So much talent at state schools being overlooked
You're kind of making his point - the second and third paragraphs are explicitly about the fact that he is not an Ivy League professor. Be the change you want to see in the world by doing the reading first.
Programmers are not expected to add an addendum to every file listing all the books, articles, and conversations they've had that have influenced the particular code solution. LLMs are trained on far more sources that influence their code suggestions, but it seems like we actually want a higher standard of attribution because they (arguably) are incapable of original thought.