I am worried about Bun • Hacker News Board

Re: I am worried about Bun

#341

Post by whywhywhywhy » Tue, May 05, 2026, 11:29 AM UTC

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.…

> It can carry out millions of conversations at once.

You're anthropomorphizing it, this isn't what it's doing. It's being fed a series of text and predicting what comes next the box has no context about the other "conversations" it's having and doesn't remember them.

Re: I am worried about Bun

#342

Post by lelanthran » Tue, May 05, 2026, 11:46 AM UTC

epolanski wrote: post #128

jazzypants wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not the biggest fan of the influencer community, but I think that it mostly boils down to many learners preferring video content over written material. I've gotten used to reading documentation now, but I remember it being extremely intimidating when I was first learning. It was nice to have someone break stuff down into simple terms for me. To be fair to Matt Pocock, I know he worked for Vercel and Stately for a…

> but I think that it mostly boils down to many learners preferring video content over written material 99% of the times that's not learning, but productivity porn.

This. You can't learn by viewing, you learn by doing.

That bill is gonna come due at some point for "developers" leaning heavily on agents.

Re: I am worried about Bun

#343

Post by lelanthran » Tue, May 05, 2026, 11:50 AM UTC

mawadev wrote: post #336

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…

Just 3 days later from the blog post, a branch with a potential vibe rewrite from zig to rust surfaced in the bun repo

This looks like a vanity project: the value gained switching from zig to Rust is likely to be negative at best, without even the usual caveat devs use of "learned a new skill".

Re: I am worried about Bun

#344

Post by Philpax » Tue, May 05, 2026, 12:59 PM UTC

vkou wrote: post #326

Philpax wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I did say > especially if you're willing to break the law / normal operating decorum in my original post. If you have a superintelligence, you have something that can find and take advantage of every exploitation vector in parallel - technical, social, bureaucratic - and use that to destroy a company from the inside. A superintelligence that is subservient to its operator is an informational superweapon. I agree that…

> A superintelligence that is subservient to its operator is an informational superweapon. The five dollar wrench attack will put an end to that operator's use of an informational superweapon. > I agree that this sounds fanciful, but you can see what existing cyberattacks can do to organisations What can it do? Generally, a minor disruption to operations. It consistently does a lot less than what law enforcement can…

Within a day - well before any legal or societal force could intervene - a superintelligence could make its way into every part of an organisation's internal network and tear it apart from the inside.

Conventional hackers are limited by the serial nature of their work - finding breaches, exploiting them, conducting further exploration of the network, trying not to get detected - in ways that a superintelligence would not be. The latter could be a hundred times as effective, a hundred times as fast, and a hundred times more parallel.

I agree that this is unlikely to happen because the societal bill would come due in time, but my point is that a month's lead is enough to do significant and lasting damage.

Re: I am worried about Bun

#345

Post by socratic_weeb » Tue, May 05, 2026, 1:02 PM UTC

>Claude Code appears to be enshittifying

AI tech bros when the bubble is blowing up lol. LLMs where always bad and unreliable for programming due to their un-deterministic nature. And regarding pricing policies, yeah, they have to make a profit somehow, it's just that the tech is too expensive vs the actual (almost non-existent) ROI it generates. Let's see if people are willing to pay when these guys aren't subsidized by the delusional VCs anymore...

Re: I am worried about Bun

#346

Post by JamesSwift » Tue, May 05, 2026, 1:15 PM UTC

wombat-man wrote: post #130

JamesSwift wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Im on pay-per-use plans so its not the limits thats the issue directly, although the product development process could lead to them trying to fix limit issue and breaking the product as a whole. The main issue is side effects of effort/thinking it seems. It hallucinates at a much higher rate and skips research in a ton of edge cases even with effort of MAX and disabling adaptive thinking, even on 4.6. Ive said before…

Yeah I have found worse results if I don't leave it on the highest setting. I have gotten by with Pro and a little overage buffer so far. I have found it working pretty well for what I'm using it for but I have really only been using it a couple months now.

A few weeks ago I went from 'high' to 'max' effort and got decent results. Since 4.7 went live it has regressed to how it was before (with the same settings).

Re: I am worried about Bun

#347

Post by ethin » Tue, May 05, 2026, 1:31 PM UTC

zem wrote: post #203

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…

oh absolutely, no argument there, the case for AGI is pretty weak. I was just saying that I am even more sceptical that any of this is a "first or nothing" scenario - that is one of my biggest pet peeves about the entire tech sector.

Right, but I never said it was a first-or-nothing scenario to begin with. Given that both AGI and ASI are so ambiguous as to be nothingburgers, talking about them is just a performative thought experiment IMO. An interesting one, certainly, but neither are even remotely close to being realized. Until we have some kind of clear definition that can be scientifically proven and reproduced, that will remain the case.

Re: I am worried about Bun

#348

Post by ethin » Tue, May 05, 2026, 1:33 PM UTC

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.…

No, I am not looking for ASI. We have yet to achieve AGI. Unless you can definitively prove that we already have? Because, I mean, if we've already achieved AGI then that obviously means that you can define what intelligence actually is, no?

Re: I am worried about Bun

#349

Post by atonse » Tue, May 05, 2026, 1:40 PM UTC

saghm wrote: post #307

atonse wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not the parent poster which is why I still stick to looking at the people... If you start seeing the people that created bun leaving Anthropic, then I'd probably start to worry. And I haven't seen any sign of that yet.

I feel like you're overestimating how much power the people who sell their company have to prevent anything that gets pushed from the top

That's why I mentioned them leaving. Because something about the culture didn't work, and they left.

Especially true if they leave before they're fully vested.

Re: I am worried about Bun

#350

Post by ethin » Tue, May 05, 2026, 1:41 PM UTC

red75prime wrote: post #320

weregiraffe wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. To realize the possibility of powered flight one only needs to look at birds. AGI, on the other hand, is another word for God.

Just define "general" as "as general as allowed by math, physics, and practical limitations." Or use a conventional reading of AGI as a human-level intelligence (which we, naturally, have a working example of).

Yeah but if you do that, you have to then turn around and look at how all the goalposts keep moving around. That is what I was (originally) trying to get at, and why I phrased it like I did. If we truly had actual (artificial) general intelligence (or were close to it) we would already have a solid definition/benchmark (and it... Probably wouldn't be what you said, but something a lot more detailed/thorough). Right now both AGI and ASI is just... Whatever. "It earns a hundred billion dollars in revenue," "It can do anything a general human can do" (ignoring the shear amount of ambiguity alone in that), "It can do most tasks a human can do" (again, ambiguous: which human, which tasks, on and on and on).