> Any selector with the " " operator on A risk expanding to the inner A even if it was intended only for the outer.

Then <a type=b> is potentially a <c>. Consider a small refactor?

SoC is how all maintainable software is built. A function for A, a class for B, DDD-spec'd modules and features, databases on separate machines, API definitions, queuing systems, event systems, load balancing, web servers.

You don't even need to think of the web to see how content and presentation are different. Try editing a text file with hard line breaks in and you'll quickly understand how presentation and content are orthogonal.

Please don’t be so condescending. We all know what separation of concerns is.

The comment said “web development”, and it’s inarguably that in the history of web development there have been at least a couple of major misapplications of separation of concerns, which have had practically everlasting negative consequences.

Read what you’re replying to before you reply to it.

> At what point does the project outgrow the AI in your experience? I have a 70k LOC backend/frontend/database/docker app that Claude still mostly one shots most features/tasks I throw at it.

How do you do this?

Admittedly, I'm using Copilot, not CC.

I can't get Copilot to finish a refactor properly, let alone a feature. It'll miss an import rename, leave in duplicated code, update half the use cases but not all.. etc. And that's with all the relevant files in context, and letting it search the codebase so it can get more context.

It can talk about DRY, or good factoring, or SOLID, but it only applies them when it feels like it, despite what's in AGENTS.md. I have much better results when I break the task down into small chunks myself and NOT tell it the whole story.

Your two opening paragraphs seem opposed to one another.

> Some brutalist architecture may be preserved, as a warning for future generations about the danger of mixing politics, ideology and architecture.

> I am the founder of the architectural uprising non-profit in Norway. The primary goal of architecture is in my view to increase peoples quality of life and to ensure social, economic and environmentally sustainability for future generations.

Can you expand on the "dangers" expressed in the buildings, and how your foundation attempts to mitigate those dangers?

Also:

> Now lets face the fact that most brutalists experiments over the last 80 years has failed miserably.

Yeah, there are a lot of failures, but you've picked on two structures which are broadly successful which is diminishing your point somewhat.

I've visited a flat/appartment in one of the Barbican towers. It was comfy, pleasant. The lifts and hallways were well maintained, well lit, generous dimensions (compared with many London apartment blocks I've seen). It felt like a "good" tower block, rather than a "bad" one.

The arts complex is amazing (slightly confusing, but very functional and fairly pleasant to be inside). The outside spaces create a buzzy calm.

I think it's an excellent complex.

I agree with your points about the tone. Money Stuff is definitely more "fun".

I find the content differs between the two, not just the presentation. Odd Lots goes into the broad scale (national, global) backstory a lot more; Money Stuff dives deep into specific businesses, people, or the technical details of a trade. Maybe your circumstances and habits mean you get more from one than the other?

I wish Bloomberg would find presenters for UK or European centric versions of both shows.

No it wasn't. It was a tool to attempt to keep people on Google's surface area rather than freeing them to browse the web as the web was intended.

I think you have read the "redistrubute the money" people wrong. They definitely, absolutely want to reduce the power the tiny minority hold over the many. That's the whole point. The money is a tool to get the work done.

On the flip side, doesn't this mean that Apple is providing indirect funding (via employment) to any OSS project their employees contribute to during office hours?

In the UK we have a great big yellow zig-zag road marking that extends 2/3rds the width of an average car across the road. It means "this is a school, take your car and fuck off". You find it around school gates, to a distance of a few car lengths either side of the gate, and sometimes all along the road beside a school.

It doesn't stop all on street parking beside the school, but it cuts it down a noticeable amount.