Storing things costs money.

If you are storing lots of things, or big things - but, frankly, anything - on someone else's computer, and you are not paying them to do so, at best, you've got a temporary offsite copy.

Even if you are paying money on it, the analysis doesn't change that much.

Storing big things on other people's computers, not keeping your own copies, especially if you haven't paid for a service, is asking for trouble, IMHO.

@reiunion we won! None of the corporate picked candidates won enough votes to get on the board.

https://www.cascadepbs.org/news/2025/05/rei-co-op-members-reject-company-board-picks-after-union-campaign

LLMs promise something enticing, but ultimately hollow: the ability to skip the dialectic and impose one's will on the machine by force. They are appealing because they do not allow space for their user to be wrong, or to be forced to encounter the consequences of their unrefined ideas.

This is why code written by LLMs is often buggy, insecure, and aimless: it is written to appease a master that does not understand the conflict between their ideas, nor the compromises necessary to resolve them.

In this model, the bottleneck is (2) and anything that isn't the native tongue of the designer is actively getting in the way of the manifestation of that vision.

THIS IS NOT HOW PROGRAMMING WORKS.

In reality, programming is an eclectic back and forth conversation between developer and machine where the former explores the possibility space and the machine pushes back by unveiling its constraints.

No 'vision' survives this process unscathed, and this is a good thing.