OK, for real, how are you working through inexperienced developers cranking out tons of stuff that makes no sense? Not talking about verbose code, but concise bits of code that they think they understand but don't.

Previously, copying and pasting from SO got you so far, but at a point, increased understanding was required to string things together. No longer.

I'm all for mentoring but it's always short notice and starting from some crazy thing.

Bees seem like they know what's going on. What about a cell, though? A virus?

It depends on the cell; an amoeba for example clearly seems to know what's going on around it. A virus on the other hand, having no metabolism of its own clearly doesn't.

Well, unless intellect is immaterial.

Maybe that's when they run all those crazy legacy jobs, but they politely shut the site down for it.

One process redesign that may be considered a moat for AI is employees intending to communicate through a sentence or two first passing the text into their AI of choice and asking it to elaborate. On the other end the colleague uses their AI to summarize the email into a bullet point or two. It's challenging for those that don't use AI to keep up.

Imagine explaining AI to 1997 you.

"It's like PKZIP, but backwards"

Easy - "It's like in the movie, but the voice is actually human like rather than robotic."

Not much of a difference between replacing a gun emoji with a water gun and find replacing "gun" with "water gun"

I would say that was a very large difference indeed.

Oops, I misunderstood your comment.

Until then, display: table kept everyone calm.

No, dealing with tables was like trying to build a house out of tempered glass.

With css grid, I can tell each element which area or column+row to occupy.

If I add or remove a random element, the rest of the elements stay in the correct place.

But do that with a table and you end up trying to glue your house back together shard by shard whilst trying not to cut yourself or breaking things more.

> If I add or remove a random element, the rest of the elements stay in the correct place.

This complaint highlights how absurdly not fit-for-purpose html+css actually is. Okay, you may want to do "responsive" design, but you have the semantic layout fixed, therefore you try and contort a styling engine into pretending to be a layout engine when in reality it is three stylesheets in a trenchoat.

> Okay, you may want to do "responsive" design, but you have the semantic layout fixed, therefore you try and contort a styling engine into pretending to be a layout engine when in reality it is three stylesheets in a trenchoat.

I need to write this up properly, but one of my bugbears with responsive design is that it became normalised to push the sidebar down below the content on small screens. And if you didn't have a sidebar, to interweave everything in the content no matter what screensize you were viewing on.

What I want is a way to interleave content and asides on small screens, and pull them out into 1+ other regions on larger screens. Reordering the content on larger screens would be the icing on the cake but for now I'll take just doing it.

This CSS Grid approach adds gaps: https://codepen.io/pbowyer/pen/azNarbZ

Using named grid-template-areas stacks the items you move to the sidebar on top of each other, so you only see one of them.

'Good' old floats get most of the way, but put the item in the sidebar exactly where it falls. Plus they're a pain to work with overall: https://codepen.io/pbowyer/pen/jEqdJgP

>This complaint highlights how absurdly not fit-for-purpose html+css actually is. Okay, you may want to do "responsive" design, but you have the semantic layout fixed,

this not fit for purpose may in fact be historically superseded usages that still are baked in to some usages affected by the relatively rapid change of the various platforms that must interact and use the respective technologies, the specification version of "technical debt"

that is to say some subsets of the numerous technologies can be used to construct something fit for the purpose that you are describing, but as a general rule anything constructed in a solution will probably be using other subsets not fit for that particular purpose, but maybe fit for some other purpose.

Yes, it's harder and takes longer to read code. Hopefully this reality will propagate to leadership.

But there's something more. It's the benefits of a first-look perspective. With these tools that's lost.

Also, it seems like we've entered phase two of sorts in the sense of we solve LLMish #1 issues by running it by #2. So writing and reviewing. I wonder what #3 will be. Maybe confirming.

Makes sense an 'AI' chip maker would say that.

That was my first thought as well. I've spent time on those cars on the Coast Line. They used to indicate the next stop, but it broke at some point. I don't ride much anymore. I'm not surprised what's pictured is NJ TRANSIT, the fallback. Would be nice to have faster trains someday. Until then, crack a beer and enjoy the ride.