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

Solid 2.0 RC: The Big

solidjs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 64 posts

Re: Solid 2.0 RC: The Big <Reveal>

#11

Post by chrisjj »

ryansolid wrote: post #5
genshii wrote: post #2

Maybe I just need to get over it, but this post reeks of Claude-isms and it immediately makes me stop caring about what the post has to say. Obviously having an LLM write these kinds of things is the norm now, but what doesn't have to be the norm is the writing style. The way Claude (and other popular LLMs) write is so obnoxious and verbose. I think a simple pass of "make this more terse and to the point" would do wo…

It was human written, fed to AI, human adjusted, re-fed, and around again — for days, with dozens of reviewers in between. (GPT 5.6 Sol doing the AI half of the lifting, for what it's worth.) So "nobody even looked at it" is the one criticism I can rule out. Everybody looked at it. But you aren't wrong. The marketting heavy parts are where the tone shows. And honestly those are the parts I write worst. Exactly why I…

> ... I tested both and shipped the one that read better

And there we have it. "AI"s prime use case. Best instead of good enough.

Re: Solid 2.0 RC: The Big <Reveal>

#12

Post by ricardobeat »

ryansolid wrote: post #5
genshii wrote: post #2

Maybe I just need to get over it, but this post reeks of Claude-isms and it immediately makes me stop caring about what the post has to say. Obviously having an LLM write these kinds of things is the norm now, but what doesn't have to be the norm is the writing style. The way Claude (and other popular LLMs) write is so obnoxious and verbose. I think a simple pass of "make this more terse and to the point" would do wo…

It was human written, fed to AI, human adjusted, re-fed, and around again — for days, with dozens of reviewers in between. (GPT 5.6 Sol doing the AI half of the lifting, for what it's worth.) So "nobody even looked at it" is the one criticism I can rule out. Everybody looked at it. But you aren't wrong. The marketting heavy parts are where the tone shows. And honestly those are the parts I write worst. Exactly why I…

> And honestly

:)

The AI tone in the announcement is light enough to be barely noticeable, but it’s there. Note that posting AI-generated comments to HN is explicitly forbidden.

Re: Solid 2.0 RC: The Big <Reveal>

#13

Post by [deleted] »

ruby14 wrote: post #9

To me this feels like true innovation in the space compared to other popular frameworks’ handling of async. In other frameworks it feels bolted on and with several gotchas; here it feels that it’s actually part of the framework. The new primitives are intuitive and they compose well, resulting in async-aware UI code that is more declarative. You get so many behaviors that you would have to manually account for in oth…

[deleted]

Re: Solid 2.0 RC: The Big <Reveal>

#14

Post by terabytest »

ryansolid wrote: post #5
genshii wrote: post #2

Maybe I just need to get over it, but this post reeks of Claude-isms and it immediately makes me stop caring about what the post has to say. Obviously having an LLM write these kinds of things is the norm now, but what doesn't have to be the norm is the writing style. The way Claude (and other popular LLMs) write is so obnoxious and verbose. I think a simple pass of "make this more terse and to the point" would do wo…

It was human written, fed to AI, human adjusted, re-fed, and around again — for days, with dozens of reviewers in between. (GPT 5.6 Sol doing the AI half of the lifting, for what it's worth.) So "nobody even looked at it" is the one criticism I can rule out. Everybody looked at it. But you aren't wrong. The marketting heavy parts are where the tone shows. And honestly those are the parts I write worst. Exactly why I…

Out of curiosity, did you use AI for this reply too? It reads a bit like it.

Re: Solid 2.0 RC: The Big <Reveal>

#15

Post by threatofrain »

terabytest wrote: post #14
ryansolid wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was human written, fed to AI, human adjusted, re-fed, and around again — for days, with dozens of reviewers in between. (GPT 5.6 Sol doing the AI half of the lifting, for what it's worth.) So "nobody even looked at it" is the one criticism I can rule out. Everybody looked at it. But you aren't wrong. The marketting heavy parts are where the tone shows. And honestly those are the parts I write worst. Exactly why I…

Out of curiosity, did you use AI for this reply too? It reads a bit like it.

Ryan has given so much to this community... perhaps he gives too much.

Re: Solid 2.0 RC: The Big <Reveal>

#16

Post by wavemode »

ryansolid wrote: post #5
genshii wrote: post #2

Maybe I just need to get over it, but this post reeks of Claude-isms and it immediately makes me stop caring about what the post has to say. Obviously having an LLM write these kinds of things is the norm now, but what doesn't have to be the norm is the writing style. The way Claude (and other popular LLMs) write is so obnoxious and verbose. I think a simple pass of "make this more terse and to the point" would do wo…

It was human written, fed to AI, human adjusted, re-fed, and around again — for days, with dozens of reviewers in between. (GPT 5.6 Sol doing the AI half of the lifting, for what it's worth.) So "nobody even looked at it" is the one criticism I can rule out. Everybody looked at it. But you aren't wrong. The marketting heavy parts are where the tone shows. And honestly those are the parts I write worst. Exactly why I…

Personally I don't think that a release announcement needs to be "marketing heavy" in the first place.

That's really the heart of the problem - in an effort to sound exciting, many parts of the article are just wasting the reader's time rather than simply explaining how things work clearly and directly.

Re: Solid 2.0 RC: The Big <Reveal>

#17

Post by terabytest »

As much as I’m trying to understand what’s groundbreaking here, and I’m really trying to appreciate it, the prose style of the article makes it completely impenetrable. I’m trying to understand what makes Solid 2.0 special, but I’m coming up completely empty, because it feels like I’m just reading noise.

Re: Solid 2.0 RC: The Big <Reveal>

#18

Post by fn-mote »

terabytest wrote: post #14
ryansolid wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was human written, fed to AI, human adjusted, re-fed, and around again — for days, with dozens of reviewers in between. (GPT 5.6 Sol doing the AI half of the lifting, for what it's worth.) So "nobody even looked at it" is the one criticism I can rule out. Everybody looked at it. But you aren't wrong. The marketting heavy parts are where the tone shows. And honestly those are the parts I write worst. Exactly why I…

Out of curiosity, did you use AI for this reply too? It reads a bit like it.

AI knows how to spell “marketting”.

Re: Solid 2.0 RC: The Big <Reveal>

#19

Post by terabytest »

threatofrain wrote: post #15
terabytest wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of curiosity, did you use AI for this reply too? It reads a bit like it.

Ryan has given so much to this community... perhaps he gives too much.

To be clear I’m not making any statement or implication about Ryan’s work or his quality as a developer. As someone who knows nothing about Solid I’m trying to read the article and understand what the USP is and struggling. And remarking on the AI tells in the writing.

Re: Solid 2.0 RC: The Big <Reveal>

#20

Post by ryansolid »

ricardobeat wrote: post #12
ryansolid wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was human written, fed to AI, human adjusted, re-fed, and around again — for days, with dozens of reviewers in between. (GPT 5.6 Sol doing the AI half of the lifting, for what it's worth.) So "nobody even looked at it" is the one criticism I can rule out. Everybody looked at it. But you aren't wrong. The marketting heavy parts are where the tone shows. And honestly those are the parts I write worst. Exactly why I…

> And honestly :) The AI tone in the announcement is light enough to be barely noticeable, but it’s there. Note that posting AI-generated comments to HN is explicitly forbidden.

Before:

Anyone who has spoken to me knows I talk in run-on sentences. I never complete a thought without interrupting myself. And I write the way I talk. I used to heavily edit that out of my writing, but now AI uses the proper punctuation and fills in where I miss words. It's like what I hear in my head but better. Because it is grammatically sound.

After:

Anyone who's spoken to me knows I talk in run-on sentences. I never complete a thought without interrupting myself. And I write the way I talk. I used to spend whole editing passes beating that out of my drafts. Now AI handles the punctuation and fills in the words I skip. It's what I hear in my head, but grammatically sound.

The result is almost always terser, more clear, and to the point. And usually all it takes is one more pass over to adjust anything I wouldn't say. In this case I kept the after verbatim just to illustrate my point.

Post reply on HN