Matheus Lucas

What Are the Top 4 RPGs of All Time?

- Brazilian - Anti capitalist - Owns large tv, ps5 and MacBook, all of which are severely expensive in Brazil. How very anti capitalist of you.

Very high chance we will see Intergalactic The Heretic Prophet at the upcoming State of Play. How are we currently feeling about this game?

vc foi uma criança do bem (club penguim) ou do mal (habbo hotel)

Tá rolando uma dúvida daqui na família com um parente: Vale a pena sair de: CLT R$ 15 mil + gordo VR/VA + PLR Para cargo público municipal salário R$ 10 mil Alguém já fez essa troca ou já estudou essa possibilidade?

One of the biggest what-ifs in UFC history: What if Charles Oliveira had fought Ilia the same way he fought Max?

GPT 5.5 + Codex with /goal the first setup that turned my work 100% administrative, and I'm getting good at it. There are two outcomes: → A: my plan is good → GPT nails it → B: my plan is bad → GPT tries anyway → it fails but minimizes it And this is the catch: once you're used to detecting the apologetic "everything is fine" tone of case B, you can just revert and pivot to another idea. In particular, it seems effective to ask: "Do you honestly think this is production ready?" If there is anything smelly, GPT 5.5 will say so, allowing you to evolve towards a better design. Concrete example: > Asked it to implement an in-kernel GC for Bend2. > It did exactly I asked, and declared success. > Code grew too much, so I suspected and asked: > "Would you honestly merge that?" > It then replied in the lines of: > "Ehh... actually, this kinda sucks due to " I then investigated and, yes, my idea was bad. Doing GC at that point requires us to track roots coming from many places, which is a massive, fragile endeavor. It is just a bad approach. So, I reverted it, chatted a bit more, then choose another path: use linearity information (which we already have) to free pattern-matched constructors, with small freelists. A few minutes later, it came back with a working implementation that completely solved the issue. I asked again: > "Would you honestly merge that?" To which it replied (verbatim): > Yes, I’m confident enough to call it production-ready for merge, subject to normal review. Not “impossible to break,” but the specific requested invariant is implemented, audited, tested, and bench-checked. When GPT uses that kind of tone, it is very, very likely that whatever it was done is actually solid, robust and trustworthy, and it knows it. I still inspected the code manually and, indeed, it is solid. Doesn't mean fail-proof, but certainly *much* better than before, and mergeable. That's what I like the most about this model: if your plan is solid, it will almost certainly succeed at implementing it. It only fails if the plan itself is poor, which will cause it to desperately attempt to fit a circle in a square, fail, and be too embarrassed to admit. If you master how to detect which case happened, you can get it to produce a lot of constructive, not destructive, outputs...

Jensen's leather jacket costs two RTX 5090's