I do not miss the days of "This site best viewed with browser X".

I've often thought, "If AI is so great, how come all these tech companies are shoving AI features down our throats for free, instead of charging real money for them?" I'm actually glad that MS is doing this, and I hope it starts a trend of more companies gating their AI features behind paywalls, and a noticable reduction in the number of popups I encounter badgering me to use AI features that I never asked for.

IntelliCode was first released in 2018, well before the current AI landscape where running each model costs a neighborhood's worth of power. Indeed, it runs using a small local model that costs essentially nothing in comparison to the rest of the machine running it.

In fact, the intent here is exactly the opposite of what you're hoping for (less AI badgering). They're trying to get people to actually use Copilot after recently missing internal adoption goals on all the AI products they're trying to shove down people's throats. The badgering is only going to get worse, and they're going to continue removing functioning, free features to do so. You should not be glad that Microsoft is killing a free lightweight product for a bloated, ecologically harmful and economically wasteful one.

I believe this comment is nuts. How the hell are you justifying the removal of a free and common IDE functionality for something that it's rate limited based on usage? In any other context, this would have been called enshittification...

And today, kids, we've learned the difference between free as in beer and free as in speech.

So, I gather that you treated your solutions as throw-away code, rather than keeping them? Kind of surprising, considering that some problems build off of each other, or otherwise benefit from sharing code; you never know when the code for one solution could be useful later. For example, a prime number generator/tester is necessary for many of the problems.

(I have all my solution code, in source control no less, so if I ever lost my account, I could just run them all and re-enter the solutions.)

> So, I gather that you treated your solutions as throw-away code, rather than keeping them?

I kept the code that I found clever or useful, but I had a very borderline approach to archiving my stuff in general back then. I was still in high school.

> who would think to focus the area first for scrolling???

Sadly, this problem is common enough that click-before-keyboard-scrolling has become second nature for me.

But Word Mastermind (like regular Mastermind) only tells you how many letters are in the correct spot, and how many are present but not in the correct spot. Whereas Wordle tells you specifically which letters fall into those categories. So it's not quite the same. (That's why Wordle only gives you 6 guesses, while Word Mastermind has 10 rows.)

Ok but in regular Mastermind, you get a white key peg for every code peg that is present but not in the correct spot.

After installing bash via MacPorts, it works for me. All except #3 cutesaver, which gives an infinite loop of:

  cutesaver.sh: line 55: shuf: command not found

shuf has been a part of coreutils since 2006.

No. In Emacs you can write a simple one line script and change anything.

In Zed, you need to write a full blown plugin, and can change only what the Zed authors exposed through their plugin API.

I've been using Dvorak for 24 years. 99% of the time I'm using my own machines, so it's fine. For the other 1% I can hunt-and-peck QWERTY well enough.

"By clicking on the image, an interactive demonstration of the Tcl/Tk application is launched using CloudTk."

No it isn't; I just get an empty frame with a close button. This is consistent on multiple browsers/platforms.

I'm guessing it works fine until there is load :). The design does seem to just proxy noVNC to a Linux host.

I wonder if you could maybe just compile wish to Wasm with Emscripten?

Worked for me

same here

Though it would be pronounced vehrt-while.

Of course. It's more a visual pun than audible, but I liked it nonetheless.