I think the risk is this; when non-technical users who've never shipped software in their life can dictate to a machine and get "instant results" it going to bring back managers not understanding that you don't just ship code. Especially these days where one bad dependency can mean downtime or worse.
FWIW I tried it with the VSCode preview in two monorepos we have - one frontend and one backend GraphQL servers with complex types - absolutely no issues (except one breaking change in tsconfig with baseUrl being removed) and fast compile times.
Same experience here with a pnpm workspace monorepo. The baseUrl removal was the only real friction — we were using it as a path alias root, had to move
everything to subpath imports.
The moduleResolution: node deprecation is the one I'd flag for anyone not paying attention yet. Switching to nodenext forced us to add .js extensions to all
relative imports, which was a bigger migration than expected.
Compilation speed improvement is real though. Noticeably faster on incremental builds.
The image itself isn’t really the point, it’s more a visual representation of a registry entry. The experiment is about whether a single persistent, scarce digital land registry could gain meaning over time, similar to how domains or social handles did.
Whether that ever happens is exactly the question I’m curious about.
But domains and social handles gain meaning and value because they are keys to something else. Even if the something else never materializes (e.g., I hold a domain for years but never build a site), they are still valuable because of the potential they hold. Similarly, a deed to land (even vacant land) represents the potential value of that land as much as it represents the land itself.
A deed is meaningless if what it represents doesn’t have the potential for real value.
edit: I commented before clicking on the link (bad me). I has assumed the “experiment” was at no cost to the participant. Now that I see that there is a fee ($10) for a deed to nothing, the “experiment” seems more like yet another AI-driven cash grab.
That’s a fair distinction, and I agree that domains or land usually derive meaning from the potential of what can be built on top of them.
This project is intentionally different in that it isn’t trying to represent future utility or productive capacity. It’s closer to a fixed record in a single persistent registry, more like a commemorative or historical artifact than a functional asset.
The closest analog is probably things like early internet artifacts (e.g. Million Dollar Homepage squares, early domain registrations, even username systems), where any meaning that develops tends to come from longevity, shared recognition, and the fact that the registry itself remains stable over time.
The fee isn’t meant to frame it as an investment, it mainly exists to prevent automated claiming and to keep the registry finite and durable. Whether something like this can ever accumulate broader significance is really the core question behind the experiment.
Yesterday I had a pivotal moment where I realised - I've allowed myself to become lobotomised by relying too much on AI agents. I wrote about it - maybe others are feeling like this too?
In 1999/2000 I worked on my own Thief levels using the dromed editor - it was both really fun to work with, and utterly frustrating - in a time before open source engines - there were so many small annoying bugs in the editor that would cause it to crash, so you SAVED often and even learned to version files as it was easy to screw up.
But the geometry that could be created was stunning - from courtyards to cathedrals, levels allowed clever use of light and shadow.
reply