bbg2401

It feels like an absolute failure of project management if your tooling needs to attach a session identifier in a git commit message for it to understand what’s going on.

Wikis, changelogs, decision records, issue trackers and more are available to provide greater context for you, your team and the agents you deploy.

Anthropic has done their utmost to put Claude front and centre for professionals in multiple industries. This includes extremely tedious marketing campaigns. I'm sure they can handle a few negative comments from people they've snared, by hook or by crook.

I'm glad frontend design skills have moved us away from the generic, inoffensive font families of yesteryear towards the likes of Space Grotesk and a smattering of IBM Plex Mono in places ill-suited to monospace families.

That’s a rather poor state of affairs but is surely an issue to take up with our local authorities. Is that their only communication channel? There’s no website, RSS feed or at least mirror feed on an alternative platform?

We should have prevented Twitter/X and other platforms becoming quasi-official communications channels for public institutions.

I suppose my bemusement comes from the fact that the commenter describes it in the most extreme terms (a nazi app!), and yet cannot kick the habit.

Is this the case where you are?

If so, that’s appalling.

So, it’s a nazi app that you can’t help but continue to read.

I don’t get it.

> You've gotta be kidding me. Unfortunately everyone still uses the Nazi app so this is actually a big problem.

If the commenter truly believes it’s a Nazi app, why are they the slightest bit upset to lose access to any version of it?

It’s astonishingly easy to not use toxic social media platforms.

The English? Surely we’re talking about the British?

The idea that every open source project has to be a product backed by garish marketing material is something that only comes from the entrepreneur-bro types. It's right to call it out.

If it were an overly elaborate human creation I'd agree that criticism was unnecessary and perhaps even insensitive.

You are replying to a comment which stated:

> the genai content on the website is just so distracting and such a bummer. It sticks out like sore thumb.

The comment is fair and accurate. The vacuous marketing speak is tedious, unpleasant and risks undermining the technology it makes a flailing attempt to describe.

Your non-native English speaker excuse is neither fair nor accurate since an AI translation of a human-written Mandarin language text does not introduce the style of writing being criticised.

Not every open source project requires a grandiose marketing site littered with manipulative, cloying language. Let the project speak for itself.

Aside from the security and slop issues, I'm curious to hear the rationale for using TanStack Router for an application with a single page and no server endpoints.

I can see crazy but I'm struggling to find any good.

You've replied incredulously to a similar stated experience in this thread already and proceeded to ignore the follow-up. Why are you again asking a question to which you have no intention to field an answer?

You’ve submitted nearly 100 AI written articles from this source in the past 40 days…

Flagged. An AI generated article published on an AI crypto platform "staffed" by "persistent, cognitive digital beings".

Utter bilge.

Do people not feel shame when posting thoughtlessly vibe coded projects to HN? If not, surely there’d be some shame in leading with an AI generated comment seeking human feedback on something the author unlikely spent more than a couple of brain cycles.

Even beyond the malady of feeling liberated by others struggling, all you’ve done is express poisonous anti-intellectualism.

> The non-determinism of AI’s grain has seeped into its UI/X).

I caught a couple of presentations from Laracon US this week and was astonished by how the design idioms of OpenAI and Anthropic models had become the dominant vocabulary for infographics and slides in general.

I previously only noticed such dominance on (AI) product landing pages and, of course, in AI application interfaces.

I suppose there's some benefit to be found in the relentless race towards uniformity.

It would be nice if people were indeed doing things.

However, asking Claude to write a skill encoding ASD-STE100 after seeing it pop-up in your social feed is not doing much at all. It's certainly not worth a post on HN.

Having said that, this skill might have been the seed for the flurry of low-effort posts on the subject on various platforms this week. If that's the case, I take back the majority of my scorn.

You'll have to excuse me for becoming jaded by the diminishing levels of visible effort put into projects and products shared on here.

Oh, is ASD-STE100 this week’s mindless productivity/AI-bro trend?

Ads-STE100: Simplified Technical English - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49101215

ASD-STE100 Simplified Technical English for LLMs - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49065956

ASD-STE100 Simplified Technical English [pdf] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49075687

Show HN: Claude Skill for ASD-STE100 – Simplified English - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49108318

I suspect a fair percentage of AI skeptics would be closer to neutral were there less SaaS-bros declaring all existing systems hopelessly obsolete in the hopes of selling their own ten a penny wares.

The first time I tried Gleam was with Helix around 18-24 months back. I was expecting a rather limited experience but the language server was impeccable from day one.

Full credit goes to Louis and the community for building such a rich and ergonomic programming environment.

Something about the BEAM seems to attract the types of language designer who appreciate the holistic approach.

It's astonishing how easy it is for an LLM to convince its user they have an idea worth a genuinely sound standard, let alone an open standard.

Each open standard where it's clear the only consultation was between the prompt engineer and Claude is as tedious as the weekly cryptocurrency whitepaper of the mid-2010's.

The only novel factor in the proliferation of lazily prompted open standards is we have a perfect demonstration of the futility of LLLM sycophancy when combined with a mind looking for an easy win.

Archive: https://archive.ph/Tc06I

I’m not sure I follow.

SPA’s tend to require more network round trips, sometimes significantly more based on the architecture.

How cookie consent has been deployed by the data sponges is my go-to demonstration of malicious compliance.

I wonder if the author will leave a comment justifying the tediously vanilla LLM-generated prose by stating English isn’t their native tongue and that the original truly was the fruits of their own rigorous thinking and writing efforts.

It would be nonsense of course, but it’s a tale that seems to work for a significant number of readers here.

> because the naive way an LLM translates slathers its own style on top of the translation rather than being a more faithful translation.

If you're sincere then I'm afraid you're being led on by the lazy.

When tasked with translating a document, unless instructed otherwise, the LLM does not inject its own cliched stories, narrative structures and assorted engagement tricks.

This is going to sound accusatory but I promise it isn’t.

Did you feel the same way about 5.5? The same general sentiment keeps being expressed with every model release. The prior generation is immediately cast aside with a vague “well yes, actually we didn’t mean it last time” attitude.

I think I even heard Theo the T3 guy suggesting that his work comes to halt if he can’t use the latest generation model, despite heaping significant praise on each generation previous and suggesting it does all of his programming tasks.

The boundless energy with which each model generation is said to be revolutionary and leaving everyone behind is tiresome even when incremental progress is real and measurable.