I’ve recently started a new project and I’ve started to bump up against usage limits in Claude Code. I’m keen to explore why this might be, I suspect that there is quite a lot going into the context that doesn’t need to be there. However, I’m starting to think that the usage limits might be a good thing. I’m going to attempt to explain why. Jeroen’s blog post about constraints. Haskell’s laziness constrained the language to being pure. ...
A few weeks ago I wrote about an issue in the book ‘Empire of A.I.’ by Karen Hao. There is now a much more in-depth look into this issue by Andy Masley. It includes a response from the author and Andy’s response to that response is well worth reading even if you don’t read the main (very detailed) post. I think both are writing in good faith here, it must be terrible to work on a book only to find you have published an error, which does seem to materially change a (fairly large) point you are making in your book. I do think Andy is correct though. ...
Update: 2025-11-24 Andy Masley has a much more in-depth look at this is issue, including a response from the author, and his response to that response is well worth reading. I’ve been following some of the debate on the water usage of LLMs. A lot of people seem concerned that this is a large issue. I’m not sure either way, but I’m coming round to the view that water usage is not a major concern, in comparison to, for example, the energy usage. ...
A couple of weeks back after the GPT-5 release, I wrote a skeptical post that the fact that the GPT-5 model picker release was botched was something of a bearish sign for llm-assisted programming: Okay, but if OpenAI cannot utilise their own models in coding/dev-ops to avoid a high-profile failure on a very high importance launch, what chance do other companies have? Why hasn’t the A.I. enabled OpenAI to improve their development/deployment strategies to avoid such techincal glitches? ...