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

41–50 of 64 posts

Re: Solid 2.0 RC: The Big <Reveal>

#41

Post by ryansolid »

dbbk wrote: post #40
ryansolid wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The challenge with this is we released too much at once. I really had a hard time with this announcement because I couldn't fit a full tour in less than a 6 article series. So how do I summarize? I picked up on the async headlines and the infrastructure pieces. We talked a lot more about the new reactivity in the beta release. The plan from here as indicated in the article is a series of followups explaining parts of…

If you made the framework you should be able to write the post explaining it, sorry

I did write the post. This is better.

Re: Solid 2.0 RC: The Big <Reveal>

#42

Post by andrewingram »

chrisjj wrote: post #8
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…

Is Claude really this bad, though? E.g. "The problem that never went away was async. Every framework, including ours, treated it as a condition that happened to it." Async treated as a condition ? And a condition happens ? And on grammar, the second it is ... the framework?? I rather suspect this is second-order output. Writings of a brain rotted by "AI". Shame, because enough of the message gets through the fog to t…

The article reads eerily like the Claude-authored drafts I did for some internal explanations of Relay’s design philosophy (it’s a GraphQL client I’ve been advocating for). I’m not one to make accusations of AI authorship, but it was a particularly striking impression with this one.

I had to rewrite the drafts very heavily in my own voice in order for people to enjoy reading them —- not that I’m a great writer, but I am human and people tend to appreciate that.

Re: Solid 2.0 RC: The Big <Reveal>

#43

Post by tregoning »

dbbk wrote: post #40
ryansolid wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The challenge with this is we released too much at once. I really had a hard time with this announcement because I couldn't fit a full tour in less than a 6 article series. So how do I summarize? I picked up on the async headlines and the infrastructure pieces. We talked a lot more about the new reactivity in the beta release. The plan from here as indicated in the article is a series of followups explaining parts of…

If you made the framework you should be able to write the post explaining it, sorry

Why? Those are completely different skillsets

Re: Solid 2.0 RC: The Big <Reveal>

#44

Post by ryansolid »

chrisjj wrote: post #8
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…

Is Claude really this bad, though? E.g. "The problem that never went away was async. Every framework, including ours, treated it as a condition that happened to it." Async treated as a condition ? And a condition happens ? And on grammar, the second it is ... the framework?? I rather suspect this is second-order output. Writings of a brain rotted by "AI". Shame, because enough of the message gets through the fog to t…

Like a cold. Sometimes people call an illness a condition. A condition that can happen to you.

We have frameworks essentially living in a completely synchronous world--like a 2D plane--and they can't tell that there is another dimension out there except for when something inserts itself into its view out of nowhere. The protocol that we arrive at to deal with async is convoluted, because it is a state that is basically inflicted on the framework. That's what we sought to remedy.

Re: Solid 2.0 RC: The Big <Reveal>

#45

Post by [deleted] »

dbbk wrote: post #40
ryansolid wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The challenge with this is we released too much at once. I really had a hard time with this announcement because I couldn't fit a full tour in less than a 6 article series. So how do I summarize? I picked up on the async headlines and the infrastructure pieces. We talked a lot more about the new reactivity in the beta release. The plan from here as indicated in the article is a series of followups explaining parts of…

If you made the framework you should be able to write the post explaining it, sorry

[deleted]

Re: Solid 2.0 RC: The Big <Reveal>

#47

Post by ryansolid »

andrewingram wrote: post #42
chrisjj wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is Claude really this bad, though? E.g. "The problem that never went away was async. Every framework, including ours, treated it as a condition that happened to it." Async treated as a condition ? And a condition happens ? And on grammar, the second it is ... the framework?? I rather suspect this is second-order output. Writings of a brain rotted by "AI". Shame, because enough of the message gets through the fog to t…

The article reads eerily like the Claude-authored drafts I did for some internal explanations of Relay’s design philosophy (it’s a GraphQL client I’ve been advocating for). I’m not one to make accusations of AI authorship, but it was a particularly striking impression with this one. I had to rewrite the drafts very heavily in my own voice in order for people to enjoy reading them —- not that I’m a great writer, but I…

Hey want to see what AI generates when I ask it to talk about Solid 2.0. It's not that. It is:

https://hackmd.io/@0u1u3zEAQAO0iYWVAStEvw/rJM9ws3Kbg https://hackmd.io/@0u1u3zEAQAO0iYWVAStEvw/H1Q8XTMSbe

Re: Solid 2.0 RC: The Big <Reveal>

#48

Post by ryansolid »

wavemode wrote: post #16
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…

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.

No release announcement has the time to explain how things work. I actually think in hindsight what Rich did by including a video in the Runes announcement worked well. I will have a livestream tomorrow.

Re: Solid 2.0 RC: The Big <Reveal>

#49

Post by noman-land »

ryansolid wrote: post #20
ricardobeat wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 prefer the before.

Re: Solid 2.0 RC: The Big <Reveal>

#50

Post by retropragma »

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…

This might be more palatable: https://gist.github.com/aleclarson/da55bca36103d582a9720dd4a...
Post reply on HN