With open source decompilations before AI, considering there are often a dozen collaborators working on the project publicly with their work done out in the open I can generally trust that multiple people went over most changes made to the project. With a vibe coded project, it’s easy for one person to push 500,000 lines of changed code with a single update that would make the review process impractical at best.

I’d rather trust the dozen people who’ve been working on a project over 5 years than someone who got a Claude subscription, hammered out something in 2 weeks, got it working well enough for their own satisfaction, then abandons the project.

By “my skin can fully turn into steel”, do you mean exclusively your skin?

Skin isn’t very thick and most of the sources I’m seeing wouldn’t put it much thicker than 3mm at some of the thickest points with a generous definition of “skin”. I’m seeing that you’d need about 13mm of steel to stop shots from most weaker handgun and rifle depending on many factors. Considering you’d need at least four times more steel than what you’d find exclusively on the soles of your feet to stop smaller/slower bullets I find it hard to believe that skin deep steel alone would make you completely bullet proof.

Supposing the steel did stop a bullet, though, the force from the impact is still going to hit you and likely cause some bruising to everything underneath the steel. Bulletproof vests slow bullets down before impact and distribute the load, but skill cause bruising. Raw, unshaped steel will offer no such benefits so you’ll have the same (large) amount of force being applied to a smaller area on your body more suddenly.

I’ve always disliked these short and sweet justifications for one pronunciation over another as there’s a million justifications that can go either way.

Here’s an arguably more more apt example considering it contains every letter from the original acronym: “GIF” as in gift.

In my opinion, go with the one the causes less confusion. There’s already a brand using the “JIF” pronunciation and nothing else using the “GIF” pronunciation so I prefer the hard G pronunciation.

Yes, they’re typically called “radicals” in Japanese learning circles, and other kanji can also be radicals. The whole system is fairly similar to root words and compound words, except that it scales much further up than English does.

For instance: two of “木” (tree, read as “ki”) gets you “林” (woods, “hayashi”), adding a third is “森” (forest, “mori”)

For another example: “三” (3, read as “san”, it’s also just 3 “1” kanji) with “口” (mouth, “guchi”) as well as an extra dash at the top gives you “言” (say, “ii”) whereas “千” (thousand, “sen”) with “口” (see prior example) gives you “舌” (tongue, “shita”), and print both of those complete kanji together gets you “話” (speak/story, “hanashi”)

The radicals and kanji used in both of these examples also have more meanings based on certain contexts and different readings, but these are useful ones for these examples.

Some of kanji and radicals combine in different ways, some of them change when they’re used as radicals for other kanji, and sometimes certain kanji are used as radicals based on either their meaning or their pronunciation. There’s plenty more examples of the very fractal/recursive nature of using radicals and kanji to build other kanji, but these were two that immediately came to mind.

Edit: I should also clarify that “radicals” as a Japanese linguistics term refers to the components of kanji, which 90-99% of the time refers to other kanji but sometimes includes symbols that on their own may not have any specific meanings or be otherwise usable on their own.