Bun is basically a wrapper over JSCore. I don't think it's that big of a feat. Furthermore they are heavily invested in vendor specific APIs which I think is not good.
Using that logic, Node.js is just a wrapper over V8.
Indeed it is
I am worried about Bun
331–340 of 368 posts
Re: I am worried about Bun
#332Re: I am worried about Bun
#333[flagged]
Re: I am worried about Bun
#334Earlier 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…
> 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…
[dead]
Re: I am worried about Bun
#335A former engineer at Bun said that "there was too much vibe coding, but my opinion wasn't taken into consideration."
https://paperclover.net/q+a/2506010139
> - too much ai chatter. so many examples of it failing to work. ill prove it by showing the most recent ai-generated pull request. yep, it’s failing. i will admit that my feedback on the above items were not very loud, but there has been no attempts to correct this vision.
Re: I am worried about Bun
#336I 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…
Just 3 days later from the blog post, a branch with a potential vibe rewrite from zig to rust surfaced in the bun repo
Re: I am worried about Bun
#337Earlier 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…
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?
It's a tenet of the eschatology from the singularity ideology that was developed on online forums over the last few decades.
The viewpoint is baked into those assumptions and boils down to the power of exponentials and poor application of game theory.
Re: I am worried about Bun
#338Earlier quoted context omitted.
The thing is, the harness _is_ the model at the end of the day: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turtles_all_the_way_down
The source code of Claude Code and Gemini CLI contradict that.
Well sure, I can find you hundreds of dead ends in mutations, but when you start parsing through what a harness does, eventually it'll just be another more deterministic and constrained model to do less creative things.
Re: I am worried about Bun
#339Re: I am worried about Bun
#340This isn't anything new and I feel the same way about Deno. We can argue about exactly how much trouble any runtime is in today vs yesterday vs tomorrow but VC funding of a javascript runtime feels inherently unstable to me. The key question is how much unique tooling you're relying on. If you can switch to Node tomorrow, great. If you can't, make sure you have a contingency plan.
The problem is this. If not VC funding, then what? Volunteer work? So other people can make money off it? Our industry has no answer how to fund infrastructure. You've got FAANG companies using open source projects built by volunteers and doing meagre grants every once in a while, not nearly enough to pay a SWE salary. A smattering of hard to get grants from NLnet, etc. And then places like Anthropic or Grok or OpenA…
Perhaps runtimes used to make companies profit shouldn't be free if we're not funding those services in a way we do other public services (taxes)?
I never thought I would come around to the Java way of thinking on this, but companies are abusing the public good.