I interpreted this as a visual bug with the sprites.
As a sailor, I love seeing ads or other random imagery of sailboats that's clearly photoshopped, with sails in nonsensical orientations or completely backwards with things like flags or hair blowing in the wind.
This stood out to me too - there's an underlying assumption that private entities _can_ say no to governments, but that's only true to a point. If the government decides it needs AI-powered killbots as a matter of national security, it can and will nationalize whatever entities it needs to build them.
The problem with "the language tooling is already a build system" is that cross-language dependency chains are a thing. The moment you need a Rust or Zig file to be regenerated and recompiled when a JSON schema or .proto file is updated, you're outside what most of those language-specific toolchains can support. This is where Bazel absolutely shines.
One major disadvantage here is the lack of training data on a "new" language, even if it's more efficient. At least in the short term, this means needing to teach the LLM your language in the context window.
I've spent a good bit of time exploring this space in the context of web frameworks and templating languages. One technique that's been highly effective is starting with a _very_ minimal language with only the most basic concepts. Describe that to the LLM, ask it to solve a small scale problem (which the language is likely not yet capable of doing), and see what kinds of APIs or syntax it hallucinates. Then add that to your language, and repeat. Obviously there's room for adjustment along the way, but we've found this process is able to cut many many lines from the system prompts that are otherwise needed to explain new syntax styles to the LLM.
More the latter. The lock guard is not `Send`, so holding it across the await point makes the `impl Future` returned by the async function also not `Send`. Therefore it can't be passed to a scheduler which does work stealing, since that scheduler is typed to require futures to be `Send`.
What I want the most here is transparency. If a creator thinks they can make better videos by partnering with a media company, great. I'm happy to judge for myself if their content is still for me or not. I donate to a number of creators on Patreon though, and I'd be angry to find out that my $ is profit for a well-funded media company instead of supporting someone working on their dream.
I wonder if this is due to the common trope in science fiction literature that changing the past in even a small way has a butterfly effect of unintended and frequently disastrous consequences.