Thanks for sharing this! I really think that when people see LLM failures and say that such failures demonstrate how fundamentally different LLMs are from human cognition, they tend to overlook how humans actually do exhibit remarkably similar failures modes. Obviously dementia isn't really analogous to generating text while lacking the ability to "see" a rendering based on that text. But it's still pretty interesting that whatever feedback loops did get corrupted in these patients led to such a variety of failure modes.
As an example of what I'm talking about, I appreciated and generally agreed with this recent Octomind post, but I disagree with the list of problems that "wouldn’t trip up a human dev"; these are all things I've seen real humans do, or could imagine a human doing.
This is the core reason that centralization is currently necessary. So admitting that it's an unsolved problem for a federated alternative is basically reinforcing Signal's point.
But that's not actually true in general; there is a default branch concept in forges, and an integration and/or release branch in most recommended workflows. That's the trunk.
For interactive use, tab-completion essentially makes this a non-issue, because shells add escaping in the appropriate places.
For scripting, where spaces are harder to deal with, unfortunately there's just not much you can do; your two options are basically to learn all of your particular shell's patterns for dealing with whitespace in filenames, or only write scripts in something other than a POSIX shell.
That's fair; Python, Swift, and most Lisps all use or have previously used reference-counting. But the quoted sentence isn't wrong, since it said no "garbage collection pauses" rather than "garbage collection."
"Garbage collection" is ambiguous, actually; reference counting is traditionally considered a kind of "garbage collection". The type you're thinking of is called "tracing garbage collection," but the term "garbage collection" is often used to specifically mean "tracing garbage collection."
One list, two list, red list, blue list
(I genuinely thought that was where you were going with that for a line or two)