Could you give more context about what Vercel features you need - is the site statically generated, or do you also need Vercel Functions?

There are several European based alternatives to Vercel. It’s also worth having a read through or posting to !web_hosting@programming.dev

Though that quote is followed by this, which indicates at least five of those vulnerabilities were real:

I searched the Linux kernel and found a total of five Linux vulnerabilities so far that Nicholas either fixed directly or reported to the Linux kernel maintainers, some as recently as last week:

Your comment reminded me of this article, The Software Quality and Productivity Crisis Executives Won’t Address, which discusses the lack of technical leadership when it comes to tackling technical debt, and that the solution is usually a rewrite.

Instead, most organisations don’t tackle technical debt until it causes an operational meltdown. At that point, they end up allocating 30–40% of their budget to massive emergency transformation programmes—double the recommended preventive investment (Oliver Wyman, 2024).

I agree but it depends on how teams create and refine their tickets. For example, you could have high level tickets, and someone picks one up and creates an implementation that’s not an appropriate fit for your architecture.

Thank you for not assuming my motivations. Could you please elaborate on what you mean by “oneshotted”? I share a lot of articles, so I’m not surprised you recognise my username.

I don’t specifically seek them out. I follow quite a few different programming blogs, and I am just sharing what people are posting about, and it just so happens a lot of people are posting about this topic.

Headless does not mean “no screen anywhere.” It means you are not required to use the company’s app or site to finish the job.

You might say: “Book a flight and a hotel in Tokyo.” A helper (with hooks into services, e.g. MCP or other agent APIs) talks to airlines and hotels for you. You might never see their homepage or their “join our club” popup.

Whilst I can see where the author is going with this, I can’t see some tasks, particularly booking concert tickets, being done by AI agents. Whilst it may be convenient for end users, it’s also open to exploitation by scalpers.

Not sure if you were even looking for paper reviews.

I didn’t write the article, I just shared it because I thought it was interesting.

I think you’re misconstruing the author’s argument, at no point does the author imply that Claude knows best, or that Electron apps are better. Their closing argument is certainly not an endorsement for Electron or AI slop.

Don’t get me wrong: writing this brings me no joy. I don’t think web is a solution either. I just remember good times when native did a better-than-average job, and we were all better for using it, and it saddens me that these times have passed.

I just don’t think that kidding ourselves that the only problem with software is Electron and it all will be butterflies and unicorns once we rewrite Slack in SwiftUI is not productive. The real problem is a lack of care. And the slop; you can build it with any stack.

Imagine being such a slop-brainwashed fanboi

Do you have any evidence for this? Looking through the post, and the author’s other blog post titles, there is very little mention of AI or Claude.

Instead of throwing labels at the author, it’s much more worthwhile to discuss their key argument about the challenges of developing native apps.

There are some really good tips on delivery and best practice, in summary:

Speed comes from making the safe thing easy, not from being brave about doing dangerous things.

Fast teams have:

• Feature flags so they can turn things off instantly
• Monitoring that actually tells them when something’s wrong
• Rollback procedures they’ve practiced
• Small changes that are easy to understand when they break

Slow teams are stuck because every deploy feels risky. And it is risky, because they don’t have the safety nets.

Guys, can we add a rule that all posts that deal with using LLM bots to code must be marked? I am sick of this topic.

How would you like them to be marked? AFAIK Lemmy doesn’t support post tags

What I’m saying is the post is broadly about programming, and how that has changed over the decades, so I posted it in the community I thought was most appropriate.

If you’re arguing that articles posted in this community can’t discuss AI and its impact on programming, then that’s something you’ll need to take up with the moderators.

In fact, this garbage blogspam should go on the AI coding community that was made specifically because the subscribers of the programming community didn’t want it here.

This article may mention AI coding but I made a very considered decision to post it in here because the primary focus is the author’s relationship to programming, and hence worth sharing with the wider programming community.

Considering how many people have voted this up, I would take that as a sign I posted it in the appropriate community. If you don’t feel this post is appropriate in this community, I’m happy to discuss that.

My nuanced reply was in response to the nuances of the parent comment. I thought we shared articles to discuss their content, not the grammar.

Regardless of what the author says about AI, they are bang on with this point:

You have the truth (your code), and then you have a human-written description of that truth (your docs). Every time you update the code, someone has to remember to update the description. They won’t. Not because they’re lazy, but because they’re shipping features, fixing bugs, responding to incidents. Documentation updates don’t page anyone at 3am.

A previous project I worked on we had a manually maintained Swagger document, which was the source of truth for the API, and kept in sync with the code. However no one kept it in sync, except for when I reminded them to do so.

Based on that and other past experiences, I think it’s easier for the code to be the source of truth, and use that to generate your API documentation.

There are plenty of humans using em dash, how do you think large language models learnt to use them in the first place? NPR even did an episode on it called Inside the unofficial movement to save the em dash — from A.I.

There is much debate about whether the use em-dash is a reliable signal for AI generated content.

It would be more effective to compare this post with the author’s posts before gen AI, and see if there has been a change in writing style.

This quote on the abstraction tower really stood out for me:

I saw someone on LinkedIn recently — early twenties, a few years into their career — lamenting that with AI they “didn’t really know what was going on anymore.” And I thought: mate, you were already so far up the abstraction chain you didn’t even realise you were teetering on top of a wobbly Jenga tower.

They’re writing TypeScript that compiles to JavaScript that runs in a V8 engine written in C++ that’s making system calls to an OS kernel that’s scheduling threads across cores they’ve never thought about, hitting RAM through a memory controller with caching layers they couldn’t diagram, all while npm pulls in 400 packages they’ve never read a line of.

But sure. AI is the moment they lost track of what’s happening.

The abstraction ship sailed decades ago. We just didn’t notice because each layer arrived gradually enough that we could pretend we still understood the whole stack. AI is just the layer that made the pretence impossible to maintain.