Live data from Hacker News

TinyLetter shut down by Mailchimp, so I built the letterdrop

github.com

61–70 of 105 posts

Re: TinyLetter shut down by Mailchimp, so I built the letterdrop

#61
post #29
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't that basically all those web framework that we've been using (except that it's worse and less maintainable)? The code generated is very hard to be maintained by human unless you're very knowledgeable and knows what specific things to change (since generally we only interact on framework level unless there's some specific requirements, like how the author proposed to "modify the prompt" instead of the generated…

At least using a framework like React would expose these HTML blocks to the typechecker.

Hmm, yep you have a point there

Re: TinyLetter shut down by Mailchimp, so I built the letterdrop

#63
post #56
post #55

The GPT-4o generated project here doesn't even take care of sending the emails - you need to implement a different worker to handle the actual email sending. Of course, this is very easy to create (as per OP), just generate the code: > After that, you need to create a Cloudflare Worker as a notification service. The code is very simple, you can use the ChatGPT to generate the code.

Jesus. Github is just going to get filled up with autogenerated crap, isn't it?

[dead]

Re: TinyLetter shut down by Mailchimp, so I built the letterdrop

#65
post #51

> secure and efficient Judging by the fact you generated it with an LLM, the quality of the code, and skimming the videos, I’m highly suspicious of the claim and don’t think you’re basing that assertion on anything defensible. Adding “make the code secure and efficient” to your prompt doesn’t make it so. I fear for the future quality of software products. Quality was already going down the drain and LLMs have the abi…

Every project that says it's "secure" is already a complete joke in itself. The multi billion companies who say that about themselves, can't even uphold that statement despite their infinite resources. "Secure" isn't a property that anyone can claim, it's a property that only can be attributed looking back in time.

Re: TinyLetter shut down by Mailchimp, so I built the letterdrop

#66
post #46
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is from the "How to contribute?" section in readme. Personally, I found it unbelievable. The author think contribute should change the prompt instead of the code.. To my best knowledge, these kind of code generation are non deterministic. This make it impossible to audit for correctness.

Isn't GPT4 non deterministic? So the same prompt won't necessarily give the same result

Yes, it is non-deterministic from our point of view, because OpenAI does not let us set the seed.

Re: TinyLetter shut down by Mailchimp, so I built the letterdrop

#67

"I used the GPT-4o model to generate the code for LetterDrop. That means the code is generated by the AI model, and I only need to provide the prompts to the model. This approach is very efficient and can save a lot of time. I've also recorded a video to show how to create the LetterDrop project using the GPT-4o model. That also means you can easily customize the code by changing the prompts. You can find the prompts…

That was unclear for me too, so I opened an issue (the very first of the project, yay!). The instructions have been updated, they might be a bit clearer now: direct contributions to the code are welcome.

Re: TinyLetter shut down by Mailchimp, so I built the letterdrop

#68
> Even I use the GPT model to generate the code, I still need to review the code and test it.

This should be the first paragraph in the README.

It's not responsible to release something like this in the first place, let alone without a big red warning sign in front of it.

Re: TinyLetter shut down by Mailchimp, so I built the letterdrop

#69
post #60
post #15

MIT license? If it‘s all ML-generated, then there is no human author and therefore no copyright. It‘s in the public domain, isn‘t it?

I would argue the person prompting the LLM and piecing it all together is still a human author. The LLM is just a tool. The average person cannot sit down and create a project with an LLM, so the human is still a key factor. To say there is no human would be similar to saying those who use Copilot are not authoring their code, when clearly there is a curator/director managing what the AI models produce. Auditing and…

The law disagrees.
Post reply on HN