Live data from Hacker News

Zig Creator Calls Spade a Spade, Anthropic Blows Smoke

raymyers.org

591–600 of 862 posts

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

#591

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There seems to be a team sport mentality with AI topic in HN these days. Almost feels like people are picking sides, and thus not being very thoughtful or rational. Sigh, there definitely an attitude creeping into the community and it's a huge turn off unfortunately.

Yeah, I think AI could well destroy this community. There’s a lot of personal identity tied up in being a hacker (broadly defined), and only some aspects of that identity will be strengthened by AI. Similar to Go and Chess, AI might make “programming for beauty” more accessible and popular. However it will almost certainly make the act of writing “code for money” much less valuable, which means many people will stop…

>I really empathize with those who loved the craft of code golf, algorithms, literate programming, the elegance of micro structure of programs, etc. and who see their world under threat.

I love all of those things but don't feel threatened by AI. I do weird microcontroller things, I have dweets on https://beta.dwitter.net I have a website for making animations using 50 characters of a custom stack expression code. Algorithms, code golf, asm, inventing instruction sets, working on my own 8 bit cpu design, all that stuff is what I choose to do with my time.

I don't feel like it is in conflict with AI generated code. There's still plenty of uninteresting code that it can do.

I see some people disliking AI because they like solving problems, which I also don't really relate to, because AI presents entirely new classes of problems.

I'm not sure how much of this is just dependent on what kind of person you are, I find it quite amusing to see the ways in which LLMs get the wrong end of the stick and find it fascinating to analyse and counter the things that lead it to go off the rails. Some people seem to have the same experiences but completely different emotional responses.

I have made things with AI that I could not have made without using it, but at the same time AI could absolutely not have produced it without me directing what needed to be done.

I think the animosity to AI is more complex. There's combinations of anger about wealth disparity, a loss of trust, another of Sagan's great demotions, and this weird anticapitalist embracing of a hypercapitalist notion of Intellectual property.

Adding to this is, I suspect a few actors spending money to muddy the waters, from the Russian government, to the discovery institute, to people who just seem to like the sound of their own voice.

Keep responding kindly, respectfully, without assuming you know the internal thoughts of others, and you can influence things in a healthier direction.

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

#592
post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it true that Jarred and the Bun team at large engaged in "outright fabrication" in professional business discussions? What do you think of that statement made by Andrew? It was serious enough that Jarred showed up to post receipts with very little commentary, so as not to distract from the receipts. The charge of professional dishonesty is very strong.

Of course you'll buy that because "receipts" were only half the story and posting little commentary gives him an edge. See: https://hachyderm.io/@kristoff/116898483283387067

[deleted]

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

#593

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anthropic is not in the programming language market; their post about rewriting Bun in Rust is full of technical details that led to improving the end product for their users Anthropic absolutely is in the programming language market. If/since AI makes rewrites to certain languages relatively easy, a success story will tie the given language(s) to the given AI company. Rust may have a tremendous success in the futu…

> Rust may have a tremendous success in the future, because it's much easier to write it with AI (ignoring for a moment whether that's really a good thing). It’s interesting that Rust could become the most deployed but the least written (by humans) programming language if the dreams of AI bros come true. If AI gets good enough to competently translate other languages to Rust then there is no point writing in Rust (a…

> translate it to Rust catching all the memory bugs in the process

That's not possible. If it were, you'd just fix the memory bugs directly in the original language.

Your best bet is to have a translation littered with unsafe blocks, so you still have to do the work of nailing down the specifics to make them safe. There's no magic "unsafe language" -> "safe Rust" pipeline, even with GenAI.

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

#594

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not helping your case. So if I use Zig, I need to do all of that perfectly from day one and I don't get any help from static analysis to do it. Or else I've poisoned my whole program in scary ways and will require a total refactor where I still won't have any help and once again can't make a single mistake.

You're not helping your case. > [what you just wrote] So they gained nothing from a Rust rewrite, except introducing more bugs into their shit codebase.

Except the blog post shows that they fixed a hundred or so known issues, patching several memory leaks and making the project viable for Prisma Compute's adoption - which it wasn't before. It's now running in production in two places just fine.

Can you point to an equal number of issue tracker tickets showing novel bugs or regressions in the canary build?

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

#595
post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was a pull request and a blog post which HN et al. collectively foamed at the mouth about. You’re acting like Anthropic sunk millions into a marketing campaign.

The entire country is watching companies like Anthropic, openAi, etc.. right now... A pull request and blog post is a big deal.

[dead]

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

#596

The more I interact with the real world and mature as a person the less respect I have for temper tantrums such as these. Even if everything you say is correct, coming across as emotional and petty just does not help your case. This just makes Zig look like a zealot fighting a turf war rather than a serious ecosystem.

> The more I interact with the real world and mature as a person

I don't think this statement has the effect you want it to have. You're not laying out the experience you're speaking from. You're just setting it up so that no matter how reasonable the next thing you say is, it will appear maximally arrogant and condescending.

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

#597
post #547

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A drum I've been banging increasingly often recently is that having friction and time to work ideas over in your mind adds huge amounts of value. Vibe coded projects have this very specific, well, vibe to them where you can clearly see that the lack of time to digest has allowed the person to not challenge their own worst impulses. You can see it in the feature bloat, the lack of depth and polish in core features and…

I feel this too but it's very hard to argue myself out of adding features like mad. Features, features, features. Tech debt may be an illusion, if the LLM can keep maintaining it all.

features with theoretical use incur cost up front and yield no value. tech debt is only part of the cost, the other is opportunity cost of writing the OPTION. There’s really no good reason to create theoretical use features.

Thinking of software from finance and derivatives pov really blew my mind. here’s the article, it has AI smell but it’s short and the mental model is good: https://newsletter.kentbeck.com/p/the-cost-yagni-was-never-a...

it’s a breakthrough for me because i too like to build so it’s hard to not build. With options, i don’t get to build blindly but there’s still satisfaction in holding the option. collect the options, system design them, build on that layer.

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

#598

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…

Everyone is motivated. It seems to me that Anthropic went out fishing for something to blow up. As Ray puts it: "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 Anthropic’s products." Sounds spot on. Others have pointed to some plausible technical benefits from the port, nam…

none of this justifies a nasty mean spirited blog post.

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

#599

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.

What do you mean?

C is unsafe 100% of the time. Rust is only unsafe in unsafe{} blocks.

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

#600
post #582

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you don't intend to write misleading stuff that makes Zig look bad What misleading stuff? Makes Zig look bad how? The posts I read were appreciative to Zig. The only “misleading” piece of either blog post that I recall was the Andrew Kelley claim that Bun wasn’t fuzzing, which was easily refuted by pointing to their fuzzing work. If there’s something more then I’d like to see it, but every time I ask nobody can…

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48891496

[deleted]
Post reply on HN