I thought the same at first, but now I find myself relying on the AI answer (as it is usually reliable) and, also more and more, I continue interacting in the AI mode on the topic that motivated my search in the first place.
Worth separating two things here: the OPH technical papers (particle mass derivations, overlap consistency axioms, IBM quantum benchmarks) are very interesting and deserve scrutiny on their merits.
But Mueller has published addenda that go well beyond physics — Rapture, a "Karma Engine" where future observers implement hell for bad actors, Jesus as an "inserted observer," named public figures facing cosmic justice.
These aren't derived from the axioms; they're a messianic belief system wearing physics vocabulary.
The technical work may or may not hold up under peer review.
The addenda are a red flag about the whole project's epistemiology.
Absolutely, same feeling here. But I also see that the author wanted to say something, and finally he manages: it begins as a rant (generated by a prompt of course) the goes to some examples that are entertaining, at least making me remember how I did some things in the past.
Some AI slop aside, nice article to help us remember that the platform is much more powerful if we dare to do some things without the crippling framework help.
Ahhh but it gave me the opportunity to ran real programs, coming from an XT!
*Edited to add an example: I could for the first time use AutoCAD.
The price difference between a 286 and a 386SX was negligible, but the software I could use, was other league.
Yeah by the time we were getting into it the 486 was already out, but we wanted the real 32 bit bus and had to be a bit careful when looking at used computers (as by that time the 386SX and DX machines were about the same price).
This article, being in turn inspired by another project, has a much more fun to read writing style.
The "Gonon: building a clock with no numeral" is full of AI slop and that is very distracting.
Two very different solutions. Autohotkey is a scripting language for specific tasks, while Delphi is unbounded in this sense. And Visual Studio has no RAD concept.
It is absolutely preferable in that sense. The web-esq interface approach is far harder than it needs to be for small applications with basic interfaces.
This can be seen in action here in Europe. Near Antwerp, in Kruibeke, we stumbled upon a military base when deviating from the A14 to fill the tank.
The whole area is blurred in google maps.
A good counterexample is the Arctic Weather Satellite project. It was defined as a new space process at ESA, so documentation required was reduced at the minimum, and risk acceptance was increased. Absolutely successful, on time, on budget, contractors happy, end users happy. But it is a small project and still difficult to replicate at large and to spread the mindset to other sections at ESA.
Source: me. I work at that project as ground segment engineer.
reply