Even if the target author is an LLM, the accountability still lands on humans eventually

not necessarily, someday we might have businesses entirely managed by agents, including the ownership and crafting itself, probably accepting crypto only where absolutely no human oversight will exist, even the money made might not be distributed to humans.

"Names cause errors" doesn't automatically imply "removing names makes the program easier to generate or reason about"

The strongest idea here, IMO, is not the syntax but the feedback loop

Pre-App Store iPhone stuff was its own kind of wild west

Once he could satisfy the expected interfaces well enough, the rest of the system seems to have been surprisingly willing to play along

Really impressive work, and a very fun read

Apple's primary concern is control over the revenue stream

The "educational" exception is definitely a convenient loophole, but it raises questions about consistency and fairness in how these rules are enforced across the board

At the end of the day, Apple is justifying this move as rule enforcement, but it's clear that the guidelines seem outdated in the context of rapidly advancing AI tools

Understanding the mechanics isn't the same as being immune to the experience