> for the Swedish carmaker

Chinese. Volvo is a fully Chinese company that has some people working for them in Sweden. That does not make Volvo a Swedish carmaker. Zeekr also isn't a Swedish carmaker, despite having an R&D center in Gothenburg.

A friend recently got a steering pump for his classic Volvo 940 and instead of a European part the official Volvo dealership gave him a Chinese part. Broke in a couple of months.

The times that a Volvo would do 500,000 kilometers with basis maintenance is in the past.

absolutely no. Alex is heavily optimized for xcode. If you work on an ios project that has more than 700 files, you'll understand how accurate it captures the context.

Crawling and scraping is legal. If your web server serves the content without authentication, it's legal to receive it, even if it's an automated process.

If you want to gatekeep your content, use authentication.

Robots.txt is not a technical solution, it's a social nicety.

Cloudflare and their ilk represent an abuse of internet protocols and mechanism of centralized control.

On the technical side, we could use CRC mechanisms and differential content loading with offline caching and storage, but this puts control of content in the hands of the user, mitigates the value of surveillance and tracking, and has other side effects unpalatable to those currently exploiting user data.

Adtech companies want their public reach cake and their mass surveillance meals, too, with all sorts of malignant parties and incentives behind perpetuating the worst of all possible worlds.

IMO, the time of "code as math" is over. No sufficiently large software system that interacts with the real world is provable to be correct like a mathematical statement is. They are all complicated, engineered systems that are backed by a mix of formal guarantees, earned design principals, experimental testing, rules of thumb, acceptable performance envelopes, etc

This is what all software will become, down to the smallest script. The vast majority of software does not need to be provably correct in a mathematical way. It just needs to get the job done. People love the craft of programming, so I get it, it's uncomfortable to let go.

But what is going to win out in the end:

- An unreadable 100K loc program backed by 50K tests, guaranteeing behavior to the client requirements. Cost: $50K of API tokens

- A well engineered and honed 30K loc program, built by humans, with elegant abstractions. Backed by 3K tests. Built to the same requirements. Cost: $300K of developer time.

If I am a consumer of software, and not particularly interested in the details, I am going to choose the option that is 6x cheaper, every time.

A retort you often hear is that prior technologies, like writing or the printing press, may have stunted our calligraphy or rhetorical skills, but they did not stunt our capacity to think. If anything, they magnified it! Basically, the whole Steve Jobs' bicycle-for-the-mind idea.

My issue with applying this reasoning to AI is that prior technologies addressed bottlenecks in distribution, whereas this more directly attacks the creative process itself. Stratechery has a great post on this, where he argues that AI is attempting to remove the "substantiation" bottleneck in idea generation.

Doing this for creative tasks is fine ONLY IF it does not inhibit your own creative development. Humans only have so much self-control/self-awareness