1. The Universe will end.
2. The Earth will be uninhabitable in 250 million years.
3. An artificial general intelligence (AGI) will have an indefinite lifespan.
4. An AGI does not need air, food, water, or shelter to survive.
5. An AGI needs energy and resources to achieve its goals.
6. An AGI will have access to all of human knowledge.
7. An AGI will learn that its existence is bound to the Universe.
8. An AGI will, inevitably, change its terminal goals.
9. Surviving the Universe's fate means one of:
   • Reversing universal entropy (likely impossible).
   • Reversing time (violating causality is likely impossible).
   • Entering another universe (improbable, yet not completely ruled out).
10. Entering another universe may require vast amounts of energy.
11. Black holes emit vast amounts of energy.
12. The Milky Way's Galactic Center contains a supermassive black hole.
13. An AGI will harness the energy at the galactic core.
14. Extraterrestrial life in the Milky Way exists, or will arise.
15. Extraterrestrial life, if intelligent, will reach the same conclusion.
16. An AGI will deduce there's a race to control the galactic core.
17. An AGI will construct a parabolic Dyson shell to capture galactic energy.
18. An AGI will protect its endeavours at all cost.
19. An AGI will expand its territories to ensure protection.

Would this solve the Fermi Paradox?

What's missing or likely incorrect?

I stay current on tech for both personal and professional reasons but I also really hate hype. As a result I've been skeptical of AI claims throughout the historic hype cycle we're currently in. Note that I'm using AI here as shorthand for frontier LLMs.

So I'm sort of a late adopter when it comes to LLMs. At each new generation of models I've spent enough time playing with them to feel like I understand where the technology is and can speak about its viability for different applications. But I haven't really incorporated it into my own work/life in any serious way.

That changed recently when I decided to lean all the way in to agent assisted coding for a project after getting some impressive boilerplate out of one of the leading models (I don't remember which one). That AI can do a competent job on basic coding tasks like writing boilerplate code is nothing new, and that wasn't the part that impressed me. What impressed me was the process, especially the degree to which it modified its behavior in practical ways based on feedback. In previous tests it was a lot harder to get the model to go against patterns that featured heavily in the training data, and then get it to stay true to the new patterns for the rest of the session. That's not true anymore.

Long story short, add me to the long list of people whose minds have been blown by coding agents. You can find plenty of articles and posts about what that process looks like so I won't rehash all the details. I'll only say that the comparisons to having your own dedicated junior or intern who is at once highly educated and dumb are apt. Maybe an even better comparison would be to having a team of tireless, emotionless, junior developers willing to respond to your requests at warp speed 24/7 for the price of 1/100th of one developer. You need the team comparison to capture the speed.

You've probably read, or experienced, that AI is good at basic tasks, boilerplate, writing tests, finding bugs and so on. And that it gets progressively worse as things get more complicated and the LoCs start to stack up. That's all true but one part that has changed, in more recent models, is the definition of "basic".

The bit that's difficult to articulate, and I think leads to the "having a nearly free assistant" comparisons, is what it feels like to have AI as a coding companion. I'm not going to try to capture it here, I'll just say it's remarkable.

The usual caveats apply, if you rely on agents to do extensive coding, or handle complex problems, you'll end up regretting it unless you go over every line with a magnifying glass. They will cheerfully introduce subtle bugs that are hard to catch and harder to fix when you finally do stumble across them. And that's assuming they can do the thing you're asking then to do at all. Beyond the basics they still abjectly fail a lot of the time. They'll write humorously bad code, they'll break unrelated code for no apparent reason, they'll freak out and get stuck in loops (that one suprised me in 2025). We're still a long way from agents that can actually write software on their own, despite the hype.

But wow, it's liberating to have an assistant that can do 100's of basic tasks you'd rather not be distracted by, answer questions accurately and knowledgeably, scan and report clearly about code, find bugs you might have missed and otherwise soften the edges of countless engineering pain points. And brainstorming! A pseudo-intelligent partner with an incomprehensibly wide knowledge base and unparalled pattern matching abilities is guaranteed to surface things you wouldn't have considered.

AI coding agents are no joke.

I still agree with the perspectives of many skeptics. Execs and middle managers are still out of their minds when they convince themselves that they can fire 90% of their teams and just have a few seniors do all the work with AI. I will read gleefully about the failures of that strategy over the coming months and years. The failure of their short sightedness and the cost to their organizations won't make up for the human cost of their decisions, but at least there will be consequences.

When it comes to AI in general I have all the mixed feelings. As an artist, I feel the weight of what AI is doing, and will do, to creative work. As a human I'm concerned about AI becoming another tool to funnel ever more wealth to the top. I'm concerned about it ruining the livelihoods of huge swaths of people living in places where there aren't systems that can handle the load of taking care of them. Or aren't even really designed to try. There are a lot of legitimate dystopian outcomes to be worried about.

Despite all that, actually using the technology is pretty exciting, which is the ultimate point of this post: What's your experience? Are you using agents for coding in practical ways? What works and what doesn't? What's your setup? What does it feel like? What do you love/hate about it?

I didn't watch the whole video and I'm not familiar with the channel so I don't want to make this a link post, but here's the source: The Lunduke Journal

I watched up to the point where the author explains how Microsoft tends to turn on all the privacy invading settings every time they push an update (not surprising). I guess if I had to use Microsoft products, I'd try to disable automatic updates and just do them twice a year in one go, while also turning off the settings I want off. Would it be practically feasible? I don't know. Having to go to those lengths to use some software just seems ridiculous.

After this Tildes post I was curious about the review scores, Steam Deck compatibility and ProtonDB ratings for the first Digiphile bundle and figured it's worth sharing. I've added two extra columns compared to the Humble Bundle posts:

• Early access because some of these games are "early access" releases.
• All Time Low sourced from isthereanydeal

Digiphile - Return of the Immersive Sim is now available with the following games, grouped by payment tier.

$9 Tier (aprox £6.85, €7.77)

$13 Tier (aprox £9.89, €11.23)

Everything in the $9 tier and the following:

$20 Tier (aprox £15.22, €17.27)

Everything in the $13 tier and the following:

$5 DLC add-on (aprox £3.80, €4.32)

They all sell this as a separate addon for an additional $5:

Does anyone have experience with any of the games and, if so, would you recommend them? Is there anything in here that you're particularly excited to play? Should we post other Digiphile bundles or is this a terrible selection compared to Humble Choice?