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

iTerm2 removes AI feature from core, creates separate plugin

gitlab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–148 of 148 posts

Re: iTerm2 removes AI feature from core, creates separate plugin

#141

Post by ecjhdnc2025 »

int_19h wrote: post #138
ecjhdnc2025 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your reading is fair considering what I actually wrote! It's just not quite what I had in mind. But what I wrote is still quite scrappy; that line is missing at least an "in general" to broaden that point out beyond iTerm 2 specifically. I need to slow down a bit more. I don't really agree with you on the LLM side of the equation, and I am bothered by the idea that this is where we're all headed. But where I…

iTerm is a "kitchen sink" type of app in general. That is, it is definitely a terminal emulator, but it has lots of features, and I doubt that most users use even half of that. So in that sense, if you're using it, you're already at least tacitly accepting that philosophy as valid. So optional LLM integration is not really out of place there in the sense that it would be in a truly minimalist terminal emulator, IMO.…

> This is the kind of stuff that you use very occasionally, when it is time to use that one command that is immensely useful for very specialized things, and which you can never in your life remember the syntax for precisely because it's not something you do every day.

Don't people make notes of that somewhere they can look it up?

I mean, you're not going to use this to generate command line arguments for commands you've never heard of before, you're likely not going to use it for commands whose outputs are crucial or behaviours unsafe, and if you do you're going to need to use your actual knowledge to check it hasn't hallucinated something dangerous before you run it -- which means consulting the manual and doing the work.

I get that man pages are a particularly rich, standardised form of training text, I just don't believe there is as much advantage in asking an LLM.

This is one of those areas where I think people project success onto LLMs where there is none. It's like the songwriting example. Sure it can write a bad song fast, but so can literally anyone half-skilled, and if you want to help it write a good song, you're going to have to redo half the work.

This is just like having a bad dishwasher.

Re: iTerm2 removes AI feature from core, creates separate plugin

#143

Post by ssahoo »

Cu3PO42 wrote: post #22

I feel really sorry for the developer. I've only been a casual observer, but from my view point the community's reaction was... not great, to put it lightly. I get that a lot of us are tired of 'AI' being shoved down our throat at every possible turn. I get that a lot of us have privacy concerns. I get that maybe you don't want it in your terminal emulator. But iTerm is a free (both as in gratis and as in libre) open…

While the AI feature wasn't as intrusive as Windows & Microsoft has been, I am glad developers protested a force AI adoption. And also somewhat successful. Only wish enterprise CXO to know where to adopt and where not.

Re: iTerm2 removes AI feature from core, creates separate plugin

#145

Post by int_19h »

ecjhdnc2025 wrote: post #141
int_19h wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

iTerm is a "kitchen sink" type of app in general. That is, it is definitely a terminal emulator, but it has lots of features, and I doubt that most users use even half of that. So in that sense, if you're using it, you're already at least tacitly accepting that philosophy as valid. So optional LLM integration is not really out of place there in the sense that it would be in a truly minimalist terminal emulator, IMO.…

> This is the kind of stuff that you use very occasionally, when it is time to use that one command that is immensely useful for very specialized things, and which you can never in your life remember the syntax for precisely because it's not something you do every day. Don't people make notes of that somewhere they can look it up? I mean, you're not going to use this to generate command line arguments for commands yo…

The workflow here is to generate the command line first, then consult the manual to see what exactly it does. Which is much easier than reading the whole thing end-to-end trying to find the exact combination for your needs to begin with.

Re: iTerm2 removes AI feature from core, creates separate plugin

#146

Post by feketegy »

irskep wrote: post #45
Cu3PO42 wrote: post #22

I feel really sorry for the developer. I've only been a casual observer, but from my view point the community's reaction was... not great, to put it lightly. I get that a lot of us are tired of 'AI' being shoved down our throat at every possible turn. I get that a lot of us have privacy concerns. I get that maybe you don't want it in your terminal emulator. But iTerm is a free (both as in gratis and as in libre) open…

I wonder if a lot of the heated discussion is purely an emotional reaction to be hit with "AI feature onboarding" immediately after a normally-drama-free terminal emulator software update. If they had gone with a much more low-key way of notifying users of the feature, maybe folks would be more reasonable. Not that I blame the maintainers for using the approach they did, though! Usually you do want to be super obviou…

> I wonder if a lot of the heated discussion is purely an emotional reaction to be hit with "AI feature onboarding"

It's most likely the reason. Everybody wants to ride the hype wave with AI just like they did with NFTs, dApps, Web3, and so on and people are tired of it.

I'm not for or against AI if we can even call LLMs AI, but I genuinely can't find a use case for an AI prompt in a terminal emulator app. I know it's open-source and I can "take it or leave it", but this feature addition to me seems more like hype than anything else.

Re: iTerm2 removes AI feature from core, creates separate plugin

#147

Post by wpm »

adamomada wrote: post #139
wpm wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The change notes nor the UI do not imply this. All this needs was a single checkbox “Disable OpenAI Integration” or codecierge or whatever it’s called. A single, unequivocal “this is not enabled” signal to the user who does not want or cannot what this feature enabled.

But how is that different from a UI which is the equivalent of a “enable openai integration” checkbox?? You needed the word “Disable” in there?

Yes? Or maybe my CISO does?

These things should be as unambiguous as the "webcam is on" LED.

Re: iTerm2 removes AI feature from core, creates separate plugin

#148

Post by Xelynega »

hwbehrens wrote: post #125
Xelynega wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

iTerm is pretty mid for a mac terminal emulator in my opinion. Before it I would recommend kitty or alacritty.

Thanks for the recommendations! I checked them both out, but for me iTerm is still a better fit. I think of my Mac terminal as my viewer into the lower level, and not as the lower level, and the batteries-included approach that iTerm takes (e.g. having a UI for manipulating the settings file) is better aligned with that view. FWIW, they both seem extremely performant and would probably be a great fit if I daily-drove…

I'm not quite sure what a UI to configure the terminal has to do with being a "viewer into the lower level" since they both run the system zsh and give the same output.

It sounds like it's more about the extra features being included than the "batteries". What features does a terminal emulator need other than "lets a user enter stdin and displays stdout/err"?

Post reply on HN