At this point, I'd rather have Zaphod.

remember 10 years ago when tech companies were actually doing interesting things instead of just being ai slop

Mel Gibson-looking ass

No article to see here.

Maybe I should start like a service where we get someone like a dedicated “agent” who has their assets hidden to buy tickets for you for a small fee… and then transfer them… like an agency… for travel… WAIT a second !

Yes you can, but they are actually in a LXC container with Wayland/X from outside (I think it is also in a KVM/QEmu). (Interesting project : https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/platform2/+/HEAD/vm_tools/sommelier/README.md) If you look at the architecture it looks more normal than Android. https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/chromiumos-design-docs/software-architecture/ Others note this: https://www.aboutchromebooks.com/now-more-than-ever-chromeos-is-linux-with-googles-desktop-environment/ It's made of lots of FOSS, but it is a dystopian version of a Linux desktop.

As with your original comment, i like your argument. Additionally, I dig the wall of text. WoT, written well, leaves little ambiguity and helps focus the conversation. I don't disagree on any particular point. I agree that its a net positive for programming to be approachable to more people, and that it can't be approachable to many while requiring apollo era genius and deep understanding of technology. It would be a very different world if only PhDs could program computers. To that, I believe the article author is overstating a subtle concern that I think is theoretically relevant and important to explore. If, over the fullness of decades, programming becomes so approachable (ie, you tell an AI in plain language what you want and it makes it flawlessly), people will have less incentive to learn the foundational concepts required to make the same program "from scratch". Extending that train of thought, we could reach a point where a fundamental, "middle-technology" fails and there simply isn't anyone who understands how to fix the problem. I suspect there will always be hobbiests and engineers that maintain esoteric knowledge for a variety of reasons. But, with all the levels of abstraction and fail points inadvertently built in to code over so much time passing, it's possible to imagine a situation where essentially no-one understands the library of the language that a core dependency was written in decades before. Not only would it be a challange to fix, it could be hard to find in the first place. If the break happens in your favorite cocktail recipe app, its Inconvenient. If the break happens in a necessary system relied on by fintec to move peoples money from purchase to vendor to bank to vendor to person, the scale and importance of the break is devastating to the world. Even if you can seek out and find the few that have knowledge enough to solve the problem, the time spent with such a necessary function of modern life unavailable would be catastrophic. If a corporation, in an effort to save money, opts to hire a cheap 'vibe-coder' in the '20s and something they 'vibe' winds up in important stacks, it could build fault lines into future code that may be used for who-knows-what decades from now. There are a lot of ifs in my examples. It may never happen and we'll get the advantage of all the ideas that are able to be made reality through accessibility. However, it's better to think about it now rather than contend with the eventually all at once when a catastrophe occurs. You're right that doom and gloom isn't helpful, but I don't think the broader idea is without merit.