https://github.com/mamedev/mame/blob/master/src/devices/cpu/...
https://keanw.com/2026/03/a-diary-of-an-agentic-retro-gamer-...
https://keanw.com/2026/04/a-diary-of-an-agentic-retro-gamer-...
https://keanw.com/2026/04/a-diary-of-an-agentic-retro-gamer-...
https://keanw.com/2026/05/a-diary-of-an-agentic-retro-gamer-...
One of my favorite ones is "Third turtle lies.". When people wonder how something reported could have been possible.
The future seems more like Blindsight [1]: hyper-intelligent, completely unconscious systems outperform, out-manipulate, and out-compete human beings purely through automated efficiency.
Except for the titular event not happening!
The first one has a legendary backstory. 2 devs snuck into Apple after their project was canceled: https://www.pacifict.com/Story/
Curvus Pro: https://macintoshgarden.org/apps/curvus-pro
“We looked at each other, took a deep breath, and launched the application. The monitor burst into flames. We calmly carried it outside to avoid setting off smoke detectors, plugged in another monitor, and tried again.”
The iOS version is at: https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/pacific-tech-graphing-calcul...
I actually write prompts like that when I'm not under pressure. Claude will sometimes completely ignore your feelings, and sometimes give a little comment, which I just find refreshing in the middle of otherwise often boring sessions. And it does not have an effect on the actual result.
Also, please try not to anthropomorphize LLMs, they hate it when you do that.
Perhaps it blocks any non-USA connection.
The training set is about patterns, not facts or specific configurations. Yes, it’s possible to extract (some) of the training set verbatim, but that doesn’t mean it’s all you can do.
It’s as if a runner were to give up running when beaten by a horse or a car. It suggests they may have had unexamined and perhaps somewhat strange reasons for doing the activity in the first place.
People have difficulty accepting just how significant their limitations actually are. We design our world to hide those limitations. As an example, it would be easy to make computer games that are unwinnable by humans because of our slow reaction times, low speed in general, and our cognitive limitations. But no-one makes such games, because few people would want to play them for very long.
The “terrible cost” in this specific case seems to be related to discovering that we were fooling ourselves about how good we were at software development.
It will be bittersweet when there's no human needed at the wheel but IMHO we are far, far from that. These models/agents are just mimicking human text and need guidance because they often get lost or stuck.
Coding (programming) is a tedious and expensive part of software engineering. There's other parts AI isn't doing, such as understanding and refining requirements, and delivery + accountability.