If I had a cloning machine, I'd make many Luigis.

They Did have a good idea in the begining. Tutanova remains.

An LLM has “zero context” about your project’s specific stack and style guidelines. In other words, an AI might produce a generic <Modal> component, but integrating it into your app’s unique architecture is still a human task. This is very old. Nowadays, in Copilot for example, you add files to context and tell "hey look how I did that thing there, do this new thing following the same structure, with the same naming conventions" and it's enough. And tools like Cursor just throw your whole project into context by default.

How many of those Saturn V rockets landed themselves back on the launch pad? NASAs milestones were not the same as, nor anywhere near as hard as, SpaceX’s. Your incompetence line shows you’re not capable of being impartial in this so there’s no real point continuing. You’re saying the guy responsible for the EV market we have no, the almost fully self driving cars we have now, the satellite internet network we have now, and the reusable spaceship booster rockets we have now is “incompetent”. You’re not here to actually have a discussion.

I thought we were going to get our share of the damages

I did read it, and my comment is exactly referencing the attitude of the author which is "It's good enough, so you should use it". I disagree, and say it's another dumbass shortcut to cash grab on a less than stellar ecosystem and product. It's training wheels for failure.

I think the principle could be applied to scan outside of the machine. It is making requests to 127.0.0.1:{port} - effectively using your computer as a "server" in a sort of reverse-SSRF attack. There's no reason it can't make requests to 10.10.10.1:{port} as well. Of course you'd need to guess the netmask of the network address range first, but this isn't that hard. In fact, if you consider that at least as far as the desktop site goes, most people will be browsing the web behind a standard consumer router left on defaults where it will be the first device in the DHCP range (e.g. 192.168.0.1 or 10.10.10.1), which tends to have a web UI on the LAN interface (port 8080, 80 or 443), then you'd only realistically need to scan a few addresses to determine the network address range. If you want to keep noise even lower, using just 192.168.0.1:80 and 192.168.1.1:80 I'd wager would cover 99% of consumer routers. From there you could assume that it's a /24 netmask and scan IPs to your heart's content. You could do top 10 most common ports type scans and go in-depth on anything you get a result on. I haven't tested this, but I don't see why it wouldn't work, when I was testing 13ft.io - a self-hosted 12ft.io paywall remover, an SSRF flaw like this absolutely let you perform any network request to any LAN address in range.