I think it was modern warfare 2 but they redacted all explicit references because activision or whoever was starting to make annoyed legal noises. The insistence on using number of functions copied as a metric is weird, like of course a port isn’t going to be a function-to-function translation, programming languages are never a 1-1 match with each other that’s kind of the point of having more than one. What we needed was an automated check that tells agents whether a reconstructed function matches the original. It should verify identical semantics. A simple PASS or FAIL signal would be enough and the agent can figure out on its own what’s wrong. Uh, sure. Also a lot of their recommendations come of as no-duh, like pressing the compact conversation button early to reduce tokens or using a common specification document across LLM instances to keep them more coordinated, how novel, are you kidding me. Another one of their recommendations is that fixing stuff causes garbage to accumulate, so if something isn’t working out you are better off starting from scratch, because tokens are cheap now! You just need to be doing the equivalent of maxing out dad’s credit cards by using multiple private subscriptions in tandem, and I guess also make sure to time your dev cycle to coincide with the two major LLM vendors having a money burning competition on their way to an IPO. Finally there’s a whole hypecycle going on currently that this feeds into, that makes headline readers think that LLMs can convert binaries right back into code now, when they are actually using an MCP to control existing decompilation software which is so far from the same thing.