Model open source leadership. Imagine the meltdown if Linus says Linux kernel is not going to be rewritten and then one day wakes up and merges full machine-assisted rewrite in Rust.
> This whole thread is an overreaction. 302 comments about code that does not work. We haven’t committed to rewriting. There’s a very high chance all this code gets thrown out completely.
I would say it is reasonably clear they had already committed to rewriting at that point.
The possibility that that particular code might be thrown out was potentially true, but also totally unrelated to the previous statement.
At the end of the day, whatever, but this feels a heck of a lot like “ah, we didn't mean for this to be public yet” rather than “this is just a random experiment”.
Ah, I thought you referring to a person. I'm sorry for misreading you.
It's still a bad HN comment, I'm afraid (denunciatory rather than curious, for one thing), but it wasn't a personal attack and not a post that would normally clear the bar for a mod reply.
I don't know if the intent was to deceive, but the comments certainly had the effect of deceiving me. I came away from that first thread thinking, "Ah, so the 'story' here is that someone on the project tried an experiment on a branch that they probably should have put in a branch on their personal fork." I was no longer thinking it was a serious possibility that an AI rewrite would get merged.
Model open source leadership. Imagine the meltdown if Linus says Linux kernel is not going to be rewritten and then one day wakes up and merges full machine-assisted rewrite in Rust.
As long as it was still GPL and it wasn't just license washing, I'd be elated.
You won't be when you can't boot your system anymore on x86.
When you don't own your company any more anything you say can be safely ignored. It was obvious that the token spend will need to be justified.
They've been shady since day one, claiming wild performance improvement compared to their competitors and never proving any of them.
You don't think installing NPM packages 2 seconds faster, something most working devs do one a month, to be amazing?
Yes it is amazing, and it was and is a big deal
- Working dev
Also once a month? Really?
I mean, that doesn't exclude the outcome that it gets merged.
That doesn't mean he was lying. Just that things changed.
It was uncertain then, and not so uncertain now.
> This whole thread is an overreaction. 302 comments about code that does not work. We haven’t committed to rewriting. There’s a very high chance all this code gets thrown out completely.
I would say it is reasonably clear they had already committed to rewriting at that point.
The possibility that that particular code might be thrown out was potentially true, but also totally unrelated to the previous statement.
At the end of the day, whatever, but this feels a heck of a lot like “ah, we didn't mean for this to be public yet” rather than “this is just a random experiment”.
AI companies love AI stories.
It is an AI company.
:p
[1] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48016880
[flagged]
Edit: my mistake. Sorry for misreading.
You've crossed into personal attack with this, and that's not allowed here. Please don't.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Which persons were attacked by their comment? The "them" is confusing me – I interpreted it as Bun the organisation / Anthropic?
I'm confused too as to how my comment can be interpreted as a personal attack on anyone.
I was indeed talking about Bun as a whole and not any particular person. I'd even include the Bun community in my "them".
But I'll take dang's word for it and will watch what I say.
Ah, I thought you referring to a person. I'm sorry for misreading you.
It's still a bad HN comment, I'm afraid (denunciatory rather than curious, for one thing), but it wasn't a personal attack and not a post that would normally clear the bar for a mod reply.
I think Jarred's response at the time was intended to cool the ridiculous hype when the branch first appeared!
[flagged]
I don't know if the intent was to deceive, but the comments certainly had the effect of deceiving me. I came away from that first thread thinking, "Ah, so the 'story' here is that someone on the project tried an experiment on a branch that they probably should have put in a branch on their personal fork." I was no longer thinking it was a serious possibility that an AI rewrite would get merged.