LLMs are always amazing doing stuff you're bad at. (And always underwhelming doing stuff you know.)

Number of parameters doesn't make the model smarter, it just makes it know more stuff out of the box.

At some point there's diminishing returns and your coding LLM performs worse because you encoded useless stuff like Pokemon combinations or languages you don't speak into its parameter space.

The "smartness" of the model comes from RLHF post-training, which is orthogonal to model size.

Also, if you're using an agentic harness a much better approach is to let the model control its own context. If you ever reach a point where your coding LLM needs to know about Pokemon, just give it a web search tool and let it google the Pokemons.

That's just... not true. Just compare any open model which is trained with the same recipe but multiple sizes.

You can compare models at OpenRouter site. Qwen 3.6 dense is in top 24% for coding.

> Just compare any open model which is trained with the same recipe but multiple sizes.

That's exactly what I did.

Source? Proofs?

Do communism and secular humanism count as "religions" here?

The Crusades and colonialism can’t be distilled down to single causes, but even if you tried, religious reasons would not be the main ones. Political and financial motivations were far bigger factors in both.

The East India Company was motivated by religion?

You'll have a hard time justifying that unless you're some sort of hardcore Jewish cryptosupremacy conspiracy theorist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhas_of_Bamiyan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_destroyed_libraries

I interview C++ developers often, and here in 2026 it seems pretty much everyone is using modern (C++20 and up) language versions.

Maybe the tooling finally caught up.

Squamous cell carcinoma does not metastatize, but my god it can disfigure people really badly if not treated in time.

> Squamous cell carcinoma does not metastatize (sic)

This is false; it does so, but slowly.

https://www.moffitt.org/cancers/squamous-cell-carcinoma/diag...

> Benign cancers are a thing.

No, they aren't. Cancer is malignant by definition.

There are benign non-malignant tumors.

You're simply wrong. Again, cancer is malignant by definition. And again, you seem to be confusing "cancer" with "tumor" -- your description applies to the latter, not the former.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaoncology/fullarticle/27...

"Malignant tumors are cancerous (ie, they invade other sites)."

https://www.cancer.org/cancer/understanding-cancer/what-is-c...

"Tumors are lumps or masses of abnormal cells (neoplasms) that can be malignant (cancer) or benign (not cancer)."

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/benign

"of a mild type or character that does not threaten health or life especially : not becoming cancerous"

That cancer is malignant by definition is extremely well known. I won't respond further.

P.S. I looked through your other comments and can highly recommend you to https://www.reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/

> cancer is malignant by definition

A distinction without a difference.

You can label a slow-growing tumor as "not-cancer" if you want, for psychological reasons, I guess; "cancer" just sounds scarier. Some slow-growing "not-cancer" tumors are faster than others. It's a sliding scale, not a dichotomy.

Remember OpenClaw?

You know why nobody talks about it anymore? Because the project has been vibe coded to death in the span of a few months.

Not only will it happen, it's literally happening right now in front of our eyes.

Do you have any evidence that the code quality of OpenClaw is to blame for its decline in popularity?

I would say far more likely is that its creator was acqui-hired and Anthropic banned OpenClaw usage.

The reality is that AI is both capable of producing sloppy code and capable of cleaning it up, if directed to do so, just like humans.

And, just like humans, code quality is very rarely the make or break factor between success and failure in business, much less popularity.

In the case of vibe-coded slop like OpenClaw it's not a question of some vague notion of "code quality", it's a case of the software shitting the bed and not working anymore, with no recourse of fixing it. (Neither humans nor LLMs have the context window to analyse and fix tens of millions of lines of code slop.)

> and Anthropic banned OpenClaw usage

If OpenClaw wasn't broken it would just use a standard token API.

But see above - as software it is fundamentally broken and unfixable.

Most people aren't in the US.

> do they perform a lot of painting job on their tools to hide the cracks?

Yes. That is what RLHF is.

It works magically if your prejudices happen to match their training set alignment.

Damn, now if only I could find 10 engineers!

A billion bucks, here I come!