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

I am worried about Bun

wwj.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 368 posts

Re: I am worried about Bun

#271

Post by solenoid0937 »

stkdump wrote: post #109
AntonyGarand wrote: post #11

I disagree with the overall premise: Before the acquisition, Bun had to figure out how to monetize at some point. Now, even though their parent company does some shitty practices with their other software (claude code), it's a stretch to assume this will also translate into making Bun worse: Being worried makes sense but I remain optimistic about Bun. Especially given the context of both of these different context: C…

It's interesting how quickly people buy the "abuse" line of thinking. We understood (and knew for a long time) that the large AI labs are not monetarily profiting from subscription users that make heavy use of their subscription. That is independent of which agent/harness is used. The fair/real price for profitable use is the pay per use token pricing. These labs play the game of trying to kill competition in the har…

If you were right Anthropic's ARR would be going down but it's not. They just surpassed $30B up from $14B two months ago.

Re: I am worried about Bun

#272

Post by dullcrisp »

zem wrote: post #121
ashdksnndck wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Basically the prime bet that they made (that one needs extremely expensive hardware to have useful AI) has already failed. I thought the prime bet was that the winning lab who reaches takeoff through recursive self improvement will make a galactic superintelligence. Not saying I believe this but the people running the labs do. Under this scenario if you are a few months behind at the pivotal time you might as well…

only if said galactic superintelligence takes immediate steps to kill all its potential competitors, or hoover up all the world's resources, or some other aggressively zero sum thing. otherwise I don't see what difference it makes down the line of you have the second superintelligence rather than the first. and that's under the assumption that you can create a superintelligence that will continue to slavishly serve y…

Well no because no one is going to be coming in to work building the next AI model after the Singularity.

We’ll all be bblbrvkxn46?/4!gfbxf’mgv5fhxtgcsgjcucz to buvtcibycuvinovrYdyvuctYcrzuvhxh gcuch7…:!

Re: I am worried about Bun

#273

Post by lrvick »

pjmlp wrote: post #125
lrvick wrote: post #80

pnpm is even worse. There is no way to bootstrap it without binary blobs making it an easy target supply chain attack waiting to happen that could hide in plain sight indefinitely.

Do you use Gentoo as OS?

I did for over a decade, but it does not go far enough with supply chain security.

I bootstrapped a new generation of Linux distribution from 180 bytes of human readable x86 machine code all the way up.

https://stagex.tools

Re: I am worried about Bun

#274

Post by jonbonjonesjohn »

gardenhedge wrote: post #224
amlug wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm the "AI cringe guy" if you want to call it that. Yet I am still waiting for someone to produce typescript that compiles wrongly. I have limited time, and the little feedback that guy provided turned out to be perfectly well answered by AI. So sorry, but either you actually criticize something actionable to just shut up, but I don't have the time to debate this if the simple few lines don't get answered.

Absolutely correct. It's not just smart to use AI in this way, it's efficient. And here's the thing most people don't get, you are saving time. If you would like more insight, just say the word.

[flagged]

Re: I am worried about Bun

#275

Post by jonbonjonesjohn »

gardenhedge wrote: post #224
amlug wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm the "AI cringe guy" if you want to call it that. Yet I am still waiting for someone to produce typescript that compiles wrongly. I have limited time, and the little feedback that guy provided turned out to be perfectly well answered by AI. So sorry, but either you actually criticize something actionable to just shut up, but I don't have the time to debate this if the simple few lines don't get answered.

Absolutely correct. It's not just smart to use AI in this way, it's efficient. And here's the thing most people don't get, you are saving time. If you would like more insight, just say the word.

[dead]

Re: I am worried about Bun

#276

Post by chr15m »

> team ships constantly

Why do people want this? Shipping constantly is how software breaks. You want tools that are good and stable, not constantly churning. I wish software developers would wake up to the idea that velocity is not a marker of quality.

Re: I am worried about Bun

#277

Post by marcus_holmes »

josephg wrote: post #228
ethin wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is also assuming that AGI is even possible. So far there is no evidence that this is actually doable over anything but billions of years (and even then we have no idea how nature really managed it). Edit: Meant to say AGI (superintelligence didn't make sense). Superintelligence is undefinable at the moment so even considering if it's possible or not is more of a philosophical thing/si-fi thought experiment than…

ASI is the acronym you’re looking for. It stands for Artificial Superintelligence. Arguably it’s already here. ChatGPT knows more than any human who has ever lived. It can carry out millions of conversations at once. And it has better working memory (“context”) than humans. And it can speak and write code much faster than humans. Humans still have some advantages: Specialists are smarter than chatgpt in most domains.…

ChatGPT can only respond to a prompt, and in the context of that prompt. It has no continuous awareness of anything. That isn't superintelligence. We are easily fooled because we have stupid monkey brains.

Re: I am worried about Bun

#278

Post by pocksuppet »

ashdksnndck wrote: post #114
stkdump wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting how quickly people buy the "abuse" line of thinking. We understood (and knew for a long time) that the large AI labs are not monetarily profiting from subscription users that make heavy use of their subscription. That is independent of which agent/harness is used. The fair/real price for profitable use is the pay per use token pricing. These labs play the game of trying to kill competition in the har…

> Basically the prime bet that they made (that one needs extremely expensive hardware to have useful AI) has already failed. I thought the prime bet was that the winning lab who reaches takeoff through recursive self improvement will make a galactic superintelligence. Not saying I believe this but the people running the labs do. Under this scenario if you are a few months behind at the pivotal time you might as well…

That's just what they told the gullible investors to get money.

Re: I am worried about Bun

#279

Post by nothinkjustai »

wiseowise wrote: post #223
nothinkjustai wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt those SWEs could have used anything other than JS.

Ironic that this comment is in thread advocating for usage of Go: "The key point here is our programmers are Googlers, they’re not researchers. They’re typically, fairly young, fresh out of school, probably learned Java, maybe learned C or C++, probably learned Python. They’re not capable of understanding a brilliant language but we want to use them to build good software. So, the language that we give them has to be…

Yeah they should have used Rust ;)

Re: I am worried about Bun

#280

Post by cesarvarela »

chr15m wrote: post #276

> team ships constantly Why do people want this? Shipping constantly is how software breaks. You want tools that are good and stable, not constantly churning. I wish software developers would wake up to the idea that velocity is not a marker of quality.

Not shipping enough is how they die, too. It's hard to find a balance.
Post reply on HN