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

171–180 of 368 posts

Re: I am worried about Bun

#171

Post by crote »

aylmao wrote: post #126
pton_xd wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Anthropic acquired Bun for their own benefit, to protect and grow their investment in Claude Code. Not for the benefit the JavaScript community at large. Sounds obvious but I gue…

Bun is not a "product" at Anthropic though, it's a tool for its developers to build products. IMO as long as it remains that way, the incentives for its developers will remain fairly aligned with the incentives of people who use it outside the company. A good example is React. Facebook's interest is that React be performant (website performance is correlated with time spent on said website), reliable (also correlated…

> Bun is not a "product" at Anthropic though, it's a tool for its developers to build products.

Doesn't that just make it even worse? If Anthropic can't even afford to spend the engineering effort on making sure their core product functions properly, why should we assume that they'll be investing serious resource into what is essentially some upper manager's loss-leader pet project?

If Anthropic is financially hurting, why shouldn't they put Bun on the bare minimum of life support?

Re: I am worried about Bun

#172

Post by robertjpayne »

All these complaints about Claude code are mostly resolved if you pay for your usage with direct API pay as you go. It’s not cheap but nearly all the complaints I see about Claude code are due to the fact the subscription plans seem unsustainable from a cost perspective.

Re: I am worried about Bun

#173

Post by stkdump »

Anon1096 wrote: post #156
stkdump wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 us…

Then explain why they started banning all third party harnesses, including those that work through Claude Code, if it still makes them money. They are cutting off profit for no good reason?

I think there were reasons to doubt that heavy subscription users are unprofitable before they did that. OpenClaw was just the tip of the iceberg.

Why don't they make token pricing dynamic if that was the case? It should then allow heavy user to get even more for their money than with the current subscription model where they can't adjust to current infra availability.

It may be that "in aggregate" sub users are (not yet) a loosing business. But in all fairness, the more useful AI gets, the more it will be used. And the more it will be used, the harder it will be to make subs cheaper than token pricing. The only counter-weight are new light users, but those will also become heavy users over time, the more useful it will be for them. And at some point it will be hard to onboard light users in the first place, because the laggards will require even more intelligence and value to get them over.

Re: I am worried about Bun

#174

Post by zozbot234 »

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…

If OpenAI has the second superintelligence they have to merge with the first and cooperate. It's a provision in their charter.

Re: I am worried about Bun

#175

Post by marshray »

pjmlp wrote: post #120
ahepp wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there any situations you would compare this to historically? To me, the obvious comparison seems to be Docker. Their tooling revolutionized software development and made cgroups and containerization accessible to the masses. Yet they generally seem to have failed to extract payment from users, even with managed service opportunities. It seems to me that there are substantial obstacles to monetizing a project lice…

The audio and 3D card pioneers in the PC world. The ones that were first to market went all bankrupt, or were acquired by others that came later into the scene.

1. At least 99% of all species that ever lived on Earth are now extinct. I.e., that's life.

2. "But for a beautiful moment in time we created a lot of value for shareholders."

Re: I am worried about Bun

#176

Post by cmrdporcupine »

wg0 wrote: post #35

OpenAI and Anthropic both are destined to doom for sure. There's no way around it and it is all in the math. Bun would be a causality. It is only a matter of time. Only company that would survive the AI race - the one where the current wave was actually invented along with the research paper, the libraries and even specialised hardware: Google. Google has a serious problem with its product management culture (long li…

Google seems profoundly uninterested in the agentic coding world though. gemini-cli is underwhelming, Antigravity not super compelling, and the Gemini model itself absolutely terrible and non-competitive in basic tool use necessary for coding, even inside their own harnesses.

It's fine for other purposes though. Which are arguably a much larger and lucrative market.

Re: I am worried about Bun

#177

Post by MoonWalk »

debugnik wrote: post #66
siva7 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of them is a much more efficient but obscure programming language from a competitor, the other is what the web is built on.

In what world is Go an obscure programming language??

The world of many, many companies.

Re: I am worried about Bun

#178

Post by charcircuit »

Cpoll wrote: post #138
ahepp wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing I don’t understand about this viewpoint (which I understand isn’t your own): why does one benefit so tremendously from getting there a month before competitors? I’m sure having a month of superintelligence with no competition would be lucrative, but do they think achieving superintelligence first will impede competitors from also achieving it a month later?

A week of superintelligence should be enough to take over the world, or at least sabotage your competitors. And even if someone else gets there a week later, they'll be permanently one week behind the curve (until the AI hits some physical limit, I suppose). But that's all just sci-fi worldbuilding.

>they'll be permanently one week behind the curve

What if the competitor's architecture is able to produce tokens twice as fast. What if the competitor secures a 1 month exclusivity deal on Nvidia's next generation?

Re: I am worried about Bun

#179

Post by MoonWalk »

sroussey wrote: post #160
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.

How is that better than Deno?

Re: I am worried about Bun

#180

Post by bel8 »

moomoo11 wrote: post #153

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

I'm no staff+, but the tooling (package manager and TypeScript runner) is very fast.

bun run is <1s for my projects, while watching for file changes. So the iteration speed is quite pleasant.

Post reply on HN