I really appreciate the "it's okay to be weird" sentiment. It has never been easier to try out a crazy idea. We may as well embrace it and try to learn something.
I've hiked in the mountains and I've swam in the ocean, and I'm perfectly content to live amongst the hills and streams of the Midwest. I suppose it's relative. I live on the east end of the state, and I find the west end pretty flat and boring. :)
I feel like I'm missing something here. Was this supposed to be a game? I just kept clicking and reading and clicking and reading. I finally gave up. If the goal is to tell a non-interactive story, I'd rather just scroll...
It's awfully literary. It reads like James Joyce attempting to convey advice about effective leadership for technical teams. In my opinion, it's an obnoxious, pretentious approach to writing about practical subjects, but I may be in the minority.
SO has always had a pretty strong stance against opinion-based questions, but this is maybe the niche they should be exploring now. Humans still have a lot to say about the "best" solution to a given problem. The whole idea of an "accepted" answer could be removed, for example, since that's what AI will already generate.
Claude is just a tool. My team members are each free to choose the text editor or IDE that they are happiest with. In the near future, I hope to be able to say the same for coding agents. I really like Claude, but I don't track Claude resources in our repos. If something better comes along, I'm betting it will be perfectly happy to parse the markdown of my existing memory files, and nothing in the repo itself will force anyone else to know that I switched.
It kind of blows my mind that the majority of Claude users have just accepted that CLAUDE.md is a tracked file that the whole team has to standardize on and share. Coding agents are the ultimate API. They conform to however you prefer to interact. Is anyone really expecting to enforce standard operating procedures with this non-deterministic black box of magic?
Yeah, this was yesterday in the web version. I only did the one run, and only for a couple of levels, so I don't think I can give you any help reproducing it.
I did a quick run on the web version. I was able to sneak attack everything on the first two levels, which felt like a bug, but I'm honestly not sure.
When I found a spear, I kind of expected to be able to throw it, but I didn't find a throw option anywhere. I think that makes the short sword better in every case, but maybe I missed something.
Overall, I love the execution. Quality retro fun with a really nice interface.
Because the goal isn't "keep this exact version of the app alive and running". The prototype is never the whole application. If your only metric is incidents, then yeah, don't ever touch the code again.
You can get a few feet closer to the moon by building a treehouse, but you still can't turn it into a spaceship.
This problem definitely predates AI coding agents, though it may be exacerbated by them. The article essentially concludes with the ancient advice of "plan to throw one away". Well sure, I also read Mythical Man Month, but how do I convince the decision-makers?
I got excited about TUIs when I was exposed to the Bubble Tea framework for Go. I'm sure that Claude has accelerated the trend, but interesting things were already happening years ago.
I think both can be true. Ideally, we should do more to address the social issues that cause people to drink and drive, but revoking licenses is still a good short-term move. We could outlaw AI policing while we work on deeper issues with law enforcement.
I've used foreign keys and unique indexes to enforce validity on even the smallest, most disposable toy applications I've ever written. These benchmarks are really interesting, but the idea that performance is the only consideration is kind of silly.
I think this is too soon to call. No one questions whether AI can build things. We question whether they can build stable things that work as expected and stay online in the long run.