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

Zig Creator Calls Spade a Spade, Anthropic Blows Smoke

raymyers.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 862 posts

Re: Zig Creator Calls Spade a Spade, Anthropic Blows Smoke

#291

Post by busterarm »

diegoholiveira wrote: post #253
busterarm wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Context matters. Big announcements and uninformed blog posts can kill your momentum. I still remember the Twitter dev blog where they abandoned Ruby/Rails and the damage that did. It turned out Twitter was doing a lot of stupid things and there was a mismatch of tools and their goals. They loudly blamed the tools and people ate it up because Twitter was big, visible and adored at the time. Their conclusions bypassed…

I remember that. It was the first time I heard about Scala. I saw a lot of RoR companies/users thinking “should we do the same?” without even realizing that they do not have the same twitter scalability problems.

It didn't even end there at Twitter.

The same engineer at Twitter decided early on that no distributed messaging technology was good enough for Twitter, so they wrote their own. It fell over and they threw it away and wrote their own again. It fell over and they threw it away and now they use mainstream tools.

Re: Zig Creator Calls Spade a Spade, Anthropic Blows Smoke

#292

Post by jraph »

woodruffw wrote: post #28

I think like most people, I don’t have a problem with Andrew “calling a spade a spade,” even if I find his reasoning motivated. The bigger problem with the post is that it talks out of both ends of the mouth: it’s clearly meant as a personal attack, but also insists that it isn’t. When I read the post, my first thought was that I wouldn’t want to build things in Zig, because any technical decision I make, good or bad…

If you don't intend to write misleading stuff that makes Zig look bad when you leave and if you avoid ghosting the Zig foundation in scheduled meetings you had with them, I suppose you should be good.

Re: Zig Creator Calls Spade a Spade, Anthropic Blows Smoke

#293

Post by woodruffw »

faitswulff wrote: post #289
woodruffw wrote: post #28

I think like most people, I don’t have a problem with Andrew “calling a spade a spade,” even if I find his reasoning motivated. The bigger problem with the post is that it talks out of both ends of the mouth: it’s clearly meant as a personal attack, but also insists that it isn’t. When I read the post, my first thought was that I wouldn’t want to build things in Zig, because any technical decision I make, good or bad…

> I can’t conceive of the leadership of the Python or Rust or any other community I’ve ever worked with doing something like that. At least for Rust, part of this is because there is no BDFL, by design. Python has moved away from the BDFL model as well, IIRC. Individual contributors can get mad and write angry personal attacks, but there’s no face of the language like there is with Zig.

Yes, I think this is a good thing about Rust.

(It’s of course a tradeoff, since Rust moves more slowly than I think a lot of people would prefer.)

Re: Zig Creator Calls Spade a Spade, Anthropic Blows Smoke

#294

Post by embedding-shape »

Anon1096 wrote: post #212
embedding-shape wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm starting to think that a way we can easily filter what's being heavily composed by (SOTA/mainstream) LLMs or not is by how "polite" the public sees their published blog post. If everyone sees the post as "polite", most of it probably been written by LLMs, as they remove anything that could be seen as "nonpolite" and human. Meanwhile, engineers who just want to publish their own thoughts and feelings on a subject,…

Your post seems pretty polite. Did you have Claude write it for you?

That'd have been fun, wouldn't it? No, I'm too lazy for that, HN gets my raw and unfiltered disgustingly human thoughts and feelings, unfortunately for all of you.

For shits and giggles, I asked Sol xhigh what it thought about my previous comment, giving it a "6.5/10 for politeness", saying "it’s polite in tone, but somewhat provocative and reductive in substance.".

Maybe this filter should also include provocativeness and reductiveness, and if it isn't provocative and reductive enough, surely it's a LLM? ;)

Re: Zig Creator Calls Spade a Spade, Anthropic Blows Smoke

#295

Post by embedding-shape »

cheikhcheikh wrote: post #160
embedding-shape wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Incredible the different takeaways people get from text content on the internet It is incredible isn't it. "Jarred was already writing slop well before he had access to LLMs" "The grapevine was large and healthy and full of juicy grapes, and all those grapes contained the juice of the same message: Jarred was a stinky manager. Poor communication, unrealistic expectations, low empathy, no experience. Just a total sh…

> There is more but I'll stop quoting to not end up copying the whole thing.

Yeah, and perhaps also because your point(s) wouldn't make much sense if people ended up reading the whole article, rather than your cherry picks ;)

Re: Zig Creator Calls Spade a Spade, Anthropic Blows Smoke

#296

Post by TripolitianFish »

LtWorf wrote: post #153
JuniperMesos wrote: post #101

> From my perspective, Anthropic is the party we need to hold accountable here. It's insane that Ray Myers thinks that Anthropic did anything related to this port that requires holding them accountable; the fact that he used those words makes me want to prevent him from having any influence over AI policy.

Funding and owning something makes you accountable yes, that's how it works normally.

Inconceivable

Re: Zig Creator Calls Spade a Spade, Anthropic Blows Smoke

#297

Post by alex_suzuki »

nihsett wrote: post #217

Zig creator's article seems to have changed? I don't remember the bottom bit being there when I read it a few days ago. > Ray’s story: Faced with a legitimate challenge of memory bugs, there were several viable options. Management eagerly approved the Rust rewrite option because it was a great marketing opportunity to showcase their new Fable model, Anthropic already uses Rust, and Zig is openly against using Anthrop…

> Zig creator's article seems to have changed? I don't remember the bottom bit being there when I read it a few days ago.

Yes, Andrew edited it. Diff here: https://github.com/andrewrk/andrewkelley.me/commit/8b86ac915...

Re: Zig Creator Calls Spade a Spade, Anthropic Blows Smoke

#298

Post by Ygg2 »

baokaola wrote: post #283
cyber_kinetist wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> clear well-scoped unsafe boundaries This is not done by blindly porting Zig code 1:1 and calling it a day. You do have to make conscious decisions about code architecture to manage Unsafe code, since you need choose the right invariants for your Safe Rust code to conform inside the module (Note that unsafe pollutes the whole module containing it, not just the code inside the unsafe block!)

There's only one language that's more dangerous than C and that is unsafe Rust. I say that only half-jokingly.

Good job falling for the Zig propaganda. I say that half-jokingly.

EDIT: You can't be serious people. Rust unsafe is safer than C, if for nothing else, for knowing which pointers are aliasable.

Re: Zig Creator Calls Spade a Spade, Anthropic Blows Smoke

#299

Post by woodruffw »

jraph wrote: post #292
woodruffw wrote: post #28

I think like most people, I don’t have a problem with Andrew “calling a spade a spade,” even if I find his reasoning motivated. The bigger problem with the post is that it talks out of both ends of the mouth: it’s clearly meant as a personal attack, but also insists that it isn’t. When I read the post, my first thought was that I wouldn’t want to build things in Zig, because any technical decision I make, good or bad…

If you don't intend to write misleading stuff that makes Zig look bad when you leave and if you avoid ghosting the Zig foundation in scheduled meetings you had with them, I suppose you should be good.

I think we can quibble about the Bun post’s factual claims. But I don’t think the post was deceptive or dishonest in its claims. Like most technical writing, it represents a vantage point.

As for ghosting in meetings: sure, that seems bad. I would also be upset if someone did that to me. But you can state that factually without making it into a personal attack. It would even be more convincing.

Re: Zig Creator Calls Spade a Spade, Anthropic Blows Smoke

#300

Post by adamddev1 »

In this whole discussion of what can be done with AI, I think a lot of people are missing the distinction between:

A. making consumer end-user apps, basic enterprise applications (making end products)

B. making tooling, libraries, languages (making things people build on top of)

What is the "software engineering" that AI will replace? A? Or both A and B?

Just because people can get away with using AI to make A apps that are "good enough" or pass test suites, does NOT meant that therefore people can get away with doing all software engineering with AI. B products require a whole other level of quality, stability, and extensibility.

I'm not saying doing A with AI is a good idea either, I just think that it's a fallacy to say that because you can do A with AI, you can do B.

Post reply on HN