Hacker News Reader

Comment by debugnik | Hacker News Reader

> (em dash) no DSLs, no foreign language bindings, just Rust.

Official CUDA port and they couldn't even bother with the introductory paragraph.

Okay, I'll try to ignore it and read the docs. Hey a custom IR, this sounds interesti-

> MLIR’s implementation, however, is C++ with a side of TableGen, a build system that requires you to compile all of LLVM, and debugging sessions that make you question your career choices.

I can't take this industry seriously anymore.

View on HN

if they didnt use AI for their webpage people would say "why doesnt NVIDIA write its website and documentation with AI? don't they believe their own story about AI factories and employees managing thousands of agents doing the work for them?"

this is exactly on brand dog-fooding I would expect from an AI hyper

Literally no one would ever say that simply for editing the LLMisms away.

why would you edit them away? they are a signal that you are an "AI first" company

I think the whole codebase was more or less written by AI...

that ship has long sailed, "it no longer matters" saying a codebase, an article was written with AI doesn't mean much, it could be good, it could be bad. folks often say it to generate outrage, but that means nothing. is the codebase great, good, bad, terrible? that's the only thing that matters.

And an LLM-written codebase is strongly correlated with a terrible codebase. So much so, that it's rarely worth your time to seriously evaluate it.

Even as someone who uses a lot of AI, if you can't be bothered to at least give it a prompt like "Go through the documentation and comments in detail and remove any obvious AI shibboleths like emdashes, it's not x it's y, rule-of-three, 'delve', excessive grandiosity and flourishes, boldness, bullet points, etc", you should receive a brisk kick in the rear.

I'd be curious to know if there is a list of these "AI shibboleths" somewhere

Not really but they jump right out at you after a few minutes chatting with it. I also asked the AI and it was pretty subjectively accurate, especially if you force it to cross reference with web searches and especially google's ngram corpus (you can readily see that 'delve' and some of the other rhetorical constructs are quite uncommon in human speech)

Wikipedia maintains a list of smells for LLM text.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signs_of_AI_writing

I feel bad about most of my comments since this is the thing I say too. If you can't be bothered to write shit, why would I read your shit?

Might be the only thing that matters to you. And, perhaps, the only thing that matters in a functional sense. But, whether it’s human-coded/written or not matters deeply to some.

No, it's always bad. It's just on a spectrum of how competent is the viewer (you and me) to notice how bad it is. It's all shit, the question is whether you are skilled and experienced enough to tell.

They also named it CUDA-oxide, flaunting their ignorance of what Rust lang is named after (fungi, not oxidation).

That's a lost battle even in the Rust community: Firefox's oxidation, Ferrous Systems, Redox, OxidOS, OxCaml (OCaml extensions partly inspired by Rust)… and every crate referencing oxidation in its name.

Yes, but have you seen the official logo? :)

What exactly are you upset about? Someone observing that MLIR is extremely complex and dependent on LLVM...?

The quoted writing is AI slop, and OP is reacting to the fact that they did not write even the introductory text themselves (or at least bother to edit out clear AI/slop indicators)

... Who cares...

Clearly I.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com