I don't get how post GPT-5's launch we're still getting articles where the punchline is "what if these things replace a BUNCH of humans".

This is well written and an interesting read but, embedding notebooks into your data pipelines smells horrible.

> It handles complex coding tasks with minimal prompting...

I find it interesting how marketers are trying to make minimal prompting a good thing, a direction to optimize. Even if i talk to a senior engineer, i'm trying to be specific as possible to avoid ambiguities etc. Pushing the models to just do what they think its best is a weird direction. There are so many subtle things/understandings of the architecture that are just in my head or a colleagues head. Meanwhile, i found that a very good workflow is asking claude code to come back with clarifying questions and then a plan, before just starting to execute.

These tools are marketed as if you just drop the jira text in and it spits out a finished PR. So it's notable that they don't work the way they are advertised.

I tried it with this prompt a month or two ago, and again now:

"Write a basic raytracer in Rust that will help me learn the fundamentals of raytracing and 3D graphics programming."

Last time it apparently had working or atleast compiling code, but it refused to push the changes to the branch so I could actually look at it. I asked it, cajoled it, guilted it, threatened it, it just would not push the damn code. So i have no idea if it worked.

This time it wrote some code but wrote 2 main.rs files in separate directories. It split the code randomly across 2 directories and then gets very confused about why it doesn't run right. I explained the problem and it got very lost running around the whole filesystem trying to run the program or cargo in random directories, then gave up.