I think the biggest tell for me was having the leader of Cursor up vouching for the model, who has been a big proponent of Claude in Cursor for the last year. Doesn't seem like a light statement.
I would agree. I am a big fan of Claude and I've Claude code a bunch although after testing Codex & GPT-5 extensively, it just gets stuck in a rut way less often and much more often is able to pinpoint issues & fixes in the codebase.
Originally, actually there was a relationship between Cursor & OpenAI. Something like Cursor was supported by the OpenAI startup fund. So Cursor seems to have branched out. I think they are just emphasizing the models they find most effective. I'm surprised they haven't (apparently) incorporated Claude prompt caching yet for Sonnet.
I find it ironic that the right sidebar of the guardian site has a "Most Viewed" list of articles constantly calling my attention away from the main article. As I scroll down, the list of "Most Viewed" articles follow...
With a few minor exceptions, the responsive view looks great to me. The issues mentioned in this thread seem less to do with imba's architecture and more to do with rushed, last-minute marketing decisions (e.g. adding in the "we're hiring" chip; which, by the way, is fixed now). No excuses, of course, although as someone who painstakingly builds nice mobile views for complex web apps, no matter how good the library is (I was using Theme-ui), the process is still like building a house on-top of jello.
Ditto; my first career break into the web app development world came from a friend who is a really talented developer although he had never heard of flexbox. I quickly helped him fix a frustrating layout issue and he got me a job developing a React app for the government. I didn't know React at the time although I've learned a ton since. All because I spent years messing around with CSS.
Very relevant and well laid out! Ideally, in-person, human interaction is best for user testing although would be awesome to see these projects become immediately accessible for UX-interested users to practice with, via e.g. an artificial intelligence bot set up to respond to UX-related questions. Or even better, users get paired up with another UX-interested site visitor over video chat and they are each given a different, e.g., card sorting scenario to take the other person through.
Really helpful projects! Thank you for sharing. The set of skills you've highlighted resonate with my UX experience. I could see this becoming part of a course in the school system where I do UX/UI work and software development.
What would you think of a Facebook alternative that was the same, except it shows you content only based on who you're around most frequently (using GPS tracking or check-ins). That way your friends in real life (who you actually spend time with) match what you see of your friends' activity online.
Tulsa, OK. For my Midwestern town's relatively small size, low cost-of-living, & southern hospitality, there's an incredible diversity of ideas. Just recently, I've discussed internet security with Mozilla staff, augmented reality with a credit card processing programmer, media in West Africa with an international, Native-American university, theology with an well-known U.K. author, oil discovery with a geologist, language learning with a Spanish author, poverty education research with a doctorate-earning Nigerian, and permaculture with a data-scientist. There are endless niche tech clubs; international, artisan restaurants; and high-end art, music, & athletics ~ surprises most people who visit.
https://www.notion.so offers an excellent balance of power & simplicity. Definitely worth a try for those who prefer to visualize the connection between different projects. Shines in long-term planning & wiki knowledge collection.
This is hauntingly similar to my corporate experience. A procedure book seems helpful when it's standardizing general cases, although when it becomes only an end for safety rather than a beginning for further innovation, the dead weight builds up.
The trouble is not the decision to optimize for financial or physical health, the issue is that Amazon seems to see some people as part of its organism (long-term entity), such as its engineering talent, and other people, like these poor warehouse workers, as a temporary part of a future robotic optimization. Companies like Apple value their lowest level employees because nobody is sure that computers will competently replicate sympathetic customer service. Amazon doesn't need its warehouse workers' soft skills, only their muscle and basic logic.