101–110 of 131 posts
> Single developer projects can build to the caliber and consistency of large development teams. Yet the simple blog website static page saying that looks very weird and broken on the desktop firefox. How large should be a development team to make proper margins in 2026?
> Single developer projects can build to the caliber and consistency of large development teams. Yet the simple blog website static page saying that looks very weird and broken on the desktop firefox. How large should be a development team to make proper margins in 2026?
> weird and broken Weird, yes. Broken, I don't think so. Seems to just be a matter of taste.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was a little "what a weird nitpick" then I opened it on FF and yeah... that's awful . Normally I'd just switch into FF reader view when it's that badly done but that doesn't work either.
I looked at it on my out of date FF and it looks fine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> when Anthropic finally collapses their 50% usage increase at the end of August, I'll definitely be forced to switch my workflow I cancelled my Anthropic subscription until they fix how their models write and it's no longer unbearably annoying and obnoxious. The concise output format is a step in the right direction but I need a few months away from them. Kimi and GLM models on Max reasoning feel pretty close to Fab…
Yes both Opus and Fable’s comment style is truly unbearable. I like the code result but it’s so annoying seeing it reflect our conversation as code comments.
> Single developer projects can build to the caliber and consistency of large development teams. Yet the simple blog website static page saying that looks very weird and broken on the desktop firefox. How large should be a development team to make proper margins in 2026?
I don't understand why no one has tried to make a harness without full shell access yet. It would be so much safer.
Is that the harness' job? It seems to me the best place for sandboxing is at the OS level (i.e. running the harness inside a container with correct access configured).
The harness says "You have access to tool X, Y, and Z, but not A, B, C".
The sandbox says "If you try to use X to access a forbidden resource, I'll prevent you from reaching it".
One will lose the opportunity to develop domain understanding if they do not get into the weeds of thinking through the problem. I use Claude plan mode to do relatively small changes and even then I find that if I actually try and think through the problem and solve it myself that I find good metaphors that will aid future work, and I will discover tangential issues which are then important to look at.
I wonder if we need a list of things to tell AI to stay sharp, like this one. Sometimes I tell the model existing design is stupid and then it explains reasoning to me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> weird and broken Weird, yes. Broken, I don't think so. Seems to just be a matter of taste.
If it's not rendering as intended across all browsers, I'd call that broken. If it renders as intended and just look bad, that's taste.
The overall layout is fairly odd & weird - but it's the same in Chrome & Firefox. There is one technical bug with the main body font-size - it uses some invalid syntax (should be invalid in both Chrome & Firefox) & Chrome seems to be accepting it (against spec). The rule:
font-size: clamp( 1.125rem, 1.125rem + (1.333rem - 1.125rem) * (100dvw - 24rem) / (80rem - 24rem), 1.333rem );
Reading this really makes me wish that I had a slightly better workflow. I'm really soley dependent of Fable to the point that I don't use other models, and I've already sort of hit a point where I'm running into usage limits every week. I am really living on borrowed time — when Anthropic finally collapses their 50% usage increase at the end of August, I'll definitely be forced to switch my workflow. When that happe…