[das_keyboard]

> But there was one downside to AI. AI was like a human which is why you could talk to it like a human. But because it was like a human, it could also be wrong like a human. So I had to make sure that it wasn't getting the answer wrong. For which I would sometimes use Google Search.

I really don't buy that this was written/created by an actual 9yr old.

But this might just be my unhealthy pessimism/skepticism when it comes to stuff on the internet.

[veesahni]

Kids dad here.

Both parents are programmers, and have also written blogs. While the motivation/drive is his own, he has helpful guidance to accomplish what he wants to do.

The blog is his own words. We helped with the outline, and also provided multiple rounds of feedback to ensure good clarity of what he's trying to express. We tried not to interfere too much with his thoughts. The quoted thought "because it was like a human, it could also be wrong like a human" is something he was telling us when he discovered it hallucinated. But he doesn't understand what an LLM hallucination is, that was his words. I asked him to share that in his blog post.

The code is written on his own. But when he gets stuck, he has us to give him hints. As programmers, we can speed up him significantly by steering him in the right direction.

[lelanthran]

I'm skeptical too, and I started at age 10 (C64, though, not html+css+javascript).

I dunno if such skepticism is healthy or not, but looking at the source I feel that it contains too many things that need explaining to a 9yo: `DOCTYPE` and all those `META` tags correctly set when they make no difference to the game, why `box-sizing` has to be specified, all those different `display` attributes correctly set for the display that is needed for that element, what the `ease-in-out` means ...

And that's without even getting to the Javascript stuff, like why use const vs let, why use backticks and interpolation, things commented out temporarily instead of removed, the way the code is modularised, etc

In short, there are too many irrelevant-to-the-output best practices implemented that, I feel (after seeing what a lot of beginner/student programmers produce) demonstrates a level of experience that cannot come from "My First Game".

The signs of an experienced hand in the development is, to me, unmistakable.

[veesahni]

Kids dad here. There's no doubt he had a ton of guidance - both parents are experienced programmers. Many things needed explaining to a 9yo, the same things that would have needed explaining to any new developer.

We went through MANY iterations (test-play/code-review + feedback + dev) before it was released to the public, which meant there was a lot of discussions and lots of opportunities for him to correct many small issues.

Some thoughts:

* DOCTYPE & meta utf-8 - he learned from Khan academy

* meta viewport - I showed him how to test for mobile and pushed to make mobile a priority

* const/let/backticks - he uses prettier in VSCode, which does this automatically

* code modularization - as a result of discussions around maintainability

[dankwizard]

"Everyone dies one day. Everyone. Even wolves. But not books. Not words. Words don't die"

-- My son, 3.

[youoy]

"Everyone lies one day. Everyone. Even dads. But not on the internet. Not HN. HN won't lie"

– My granpa, 86

[efilife]

Quotes like this always seem smart until you realize you can just burn the books. And the words die like that

[veesahni]

love it.

[Cotterzz]

I started around the same age. Though sadly not with JS and modern browser tech. The most difficult concepts in use here are arrays and function calls. So quite possible for a clever 9 year old. If he was using an entity component system or monads I would be more skeptical