The article itself, and the flagged comment they made on this thread, are also LLM-generated. I feel like we've been on an upwards trend of LLM-generated posts explicitly claiming "I wrote X".
Could he have written the assembly, but used AI for the MD file? Is there harm if that is case? Because AI is good at spitting out documentation, so why not.
If you click the little "vibeSwitch" text in the bottom left, then click the small toggle in the bottom right of the popup window, you can turn off the animated background, and the website runs a hell of a lot better, on my browser at least
> It's a Wolfenstein-3D-style DDA (a.k.a. Digital Differential Analyzer) raycaster written entirely in x86-64 assembly (Intel syntax) that runs at a locked 60 FPS. And there is not a single line of C anywhere in the source. Sounds amazing. Right?
Not trying to be overly critical, but that sounds more like extra credit homework.
"Runs Wolf3D at 60fps" isn't an impressive claim nowadays either way. It feels like a very bizarre statement, which is probably because an LLM wrote everything here.
I wonder if his interview loop was actually as good as he thinks it was?
It saddens me when people with talent talk about 4 interview stages and still getting turned down. With no feedback? Maybe it was soft skills? What is happening in this market?
I liked how the web page loaded. Others diss it, but I think it was done on purpose as a style.
It's clear some talent is on display here, but I think it's being focused on the wrong thing. If I had to give some advice, focus on making something people want to use instead of trying to impress by making up arbitrary challenges.
