Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I am worried about Bun

wwj.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 368 posts

Re: I am worried about Bun

#151

Post by sroussey »

zem wrote: post #121
ashdksnndck wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Basically the prime bet that they made (that one needs extremely expensive hardware to have useful AI) has already failed. I thought the prime bet was that the winning lab who reaches takeoff through recursive self improvement will make a galactic superintelligence. Not saying I believe this but the people running the labs do. Under this scenario if you are a few months behind at the pivotal time you might as well…

only if said galactic superintelligence takes immediate steps to kill all its potential competitors, or hoover up all the world's resources, or some other aggressively zero sum thing. otherwise I don't see what difference it makes down the line of you have the second superintelligence rather than the first. and that's under the assumption that you can create a superintelligence that will continue to slavishly serve y…

One could argue that AI has already started to hoover up all the world’s resources. AI buildout as a percent of GDP is already high and still rising.

Re: I am worried about Bun

#154

Post by sroussey »

remote-dev wrote: post #22
AntonyGarand wrote: post #11

I disagree with the overall premise: Before the acquisition, Bun had to figure out how to monetize at some point. Now, even though their parent company does some shitty practices with their other software (claude code), it's a stretch to assume this will also translate into making Bun worse: Being worried makes sense but I remain optimistic about Bun. Especially given the context of both of these different context: C…

This is a good take, and I hope you're right. One favorable way to phrase it for Anthropic is they acquired Bun because CC and other internal tooling depended on it so heavily and they questioned it's future as purely OSS. It remains to be seen how things will actually unfold.

Own your supply chain. Reduces risk.

Re: I am worried about Bun

#155

Post by munk-a »

sroussey wrote: post #151
zem wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

only if said galactic superintelligence takes immediate steps to kill all its potential competitors, or hoover up all the world's resources, or some other aggressively zero sum thing. otherwise I don't see what difference it makes down the line of you have the second superintelligence rather than the first. and that's under the assumption that you can create a superintelligence that will continue to slavishly serve y…

One could argue that AI has already started to hoover up all the world’s resources. AI buildout as a percent of GDP is already high and still rising.

Don't blame machines for our folly. This is just standard bubble behavior.

Re: I am worried about Bun

#156

Post by Anon1096 »

stkdump wrote: post #109
AntonyGarand wrote: post #11

I disagree with the overall premise: Before the acquisition, Bun had to figure out how to monetize at some point. Now, even though their parent company does some shitty practices with their other software (claude code), it's a stretch to assume this will also translate into making Bun worse: Being worried makes sense but I remain optimistic about Bun. Especially given the context of both of these different context: C…

It's interesting how quickly people buy the "abuse" line of thinking. We understood (and knew for a long time) that the large AI labs are not monetarily profiting from subscription users that make heavy use of their subscription. That is independent of which agent/harness is used. The fair/real price for profitable use is the pay per use token pricing. These labs play the game of trying to kill competition in the har…

> We understood (and knew for a long time) that the large AI labs are not monetarily profiting from subscription users that make heavy use of their subscription.

I dont think this is "understood" or "known" to anyone except Ed Zitron. Subscription plans like Claude Code also have rolling usage limits, it could be profitable. Inference is very cheap and unless you're using OpenClaw no one is actually maxing out the usage window at all times. I'm sure in aggregate the subs are not money furnaces.

Re: I am worried about Bun

#157

Post by [deleted] »

gwd wrote: post #113

> But from the outside, Claude Code looks like a tool moving in the wrong direction. More restrictions, billing weirdness, surprise behavior based on text in commits. That is textbook enshittification. I've never used Claude Code, but this person doesn't understand what "textbook enshittification" means. "Enshittification" is a feature of certain kinds of business models, progressing through the following stages: 1.…

[deleted]

Re: I am worried about Bun

#158

Post by nwienert »

Bun has never really been well run. Every feature it had was full of bugs and gaps. And every release fixed a few but broke others.

They released more major features and breaking changes in their last patch release than most software sees in two major versions.

I've been using it just as a script runner and npm package manager basically, and it's incredible the amount of work you have to do to find "good" versions. We've had patch versions suddenly freeze on install more than once, we couldn't upgrade for quite a while due to this. I think they broke postinstall scripts with trustedDependencies entirely two minor versions ago - not a mention in release notes, and somehow no one reporting it in GH issues. In 1.1 or so you could get Bun to do trustedDependency builds in postinstall, and then after that you couldn't. I looked around for release notes and saw nothing mentioned. It's been broken for months.

Re: I am worried about Bun

#159

Post by fwipsy »

zem wrote: post #121
ashdksnndck wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Basically the prime bet that they made (that one needs extremely expensive hardware to have useful AI) has already failed. I thought the prime bet was that the winning lab who reaches takeoff through recursive self improvement will make a galactic superintelligence. Not saying I believe this but the people running the labs do. Under this scenario if you are a few months behind at the pivotal time you might as well…

only if said galactic superintelligence takes immediate steps to kill all its potential competitors, or hoover up all the world's resources, or some other aggressively zero sum thing. otherwise I don't see what difference it makes down the line of you have the second superintelligence rather than the first. and that's under the assumption that you can create a superintelligence that will continue to slavishly serve y…

Anthropic/OpenAI aren't planning to have their superintelligence take over the world, but they're still afraid that someone else will do it.

Re: I am worried about Bun

#160

Post by sroussey »

moomoo11 wrote: post #153

Why do people use bun? Would like an answer from an actual experienced / staff tier or higher engineer.

Simplicity.

bun file.ts

And it’s been this way for years.

Don’t care about what’s in a package.json file or if there is one. Can do this without tsconfig file as well.

Post reply on HN