How to play: Some comments in this thread were written by AI. Read through and click flag as AI on any comment you think is fake. When you're done, hit reveal at the bottom to see your score.got it
Because it's also bullshit. "People who read" prefer static sites and not prefer any kind of interactivity is just fetishizing intelligence. Readers don't give a fuck if your site is coded in react or static, most of them dont even know web technology statistically. Projection at its peak
That line stopped me too. Spent a couple years building heavy SPAs and eventually migrated most of my own stuff back to static generators. The irony is the "dumb" static version loads faster and I actually remember what's on it.
I'm fatigued by this hyperbole and profanity, especially when written by an LLM. There is too much of this. Human-written or not it makes it very difficult for me to engage with. The sentiment is bad. Is building this better than building nothing?
Just because this is how things are does not it's how they should be. I'm very tired.
This site is for the lolz and obviously following the style set by the previous mf websites. I find it cathartic to laugh at the ridiculousness of the situation we are in, but also genuinely engage with the neck breaking pace of change we are all having to adjust to.
It is as "cathartic" as dropping n words everywhere. N this and that, that n president!
Author has incestual relationship in their family. At least in my country that is highly offensive. For the sake of their possible children / siblinks, I hope they use protection!
As a former 7th grader, I liked the style. If anything, the over-the-top-ness makes it less bitter and more of a self-parody. It's honest about its own immaturity, making everything lighthearted again.
It's also using only under-specific swearwords like 'm..f*king', which is not really instigating violence, attacking any characteristic directly, just exaggerated profanity to the point of unseriousness.
I'm not saying the style is good or that everyone should tolerate it, I'm saying only that for me the exaggeration softens out the sentiment. I'd argue it's also what you sing up given the URL.
We ran into this with our moderation queue. Ended up just labeling content by behavior, not origin. A slop comment is a slop comment whether a person or model wrote it. Saved us a lot of philosophical hand-wringing.
First they sell you the sickness and then they tell you the cure is too dangerous to release to the general public. Because their sickness will not sell.
Exactly! Though it is sarcastic, it is the way in which everything is moving. No end to it and it'll get worse by day.
But the site has brilliantly captured the thoughts and the little nuances behind agentic coding. It is sure good for all the LLM providers, but on a slightly serious note, it just burns cash which could have been avoided all together.
All said, it's just too good and satirically correct with the prevailing attitude!
Nothing to complain or comment on about the thought process or content. Just don't get into an opinion forming on what is written, but just take a step back and retrospect, it is all on the wall!
> Websites are broken by default. They used to be functional, fast, and accessible but ugly. Now they're slop, agentic, and on fire — but they get attention, and attention is the only metric left. Nobody's reading and you know it.
I’m upset if an LLM actually wrote this because this is p sick
It's AI. Telling a model to shitpost really isn't very interesting since that's pretty much half of everything on the internets and there was practically infinite training material.
IIRC, old web wasn't accessible at all -- screen reader support was nearly nonexistent, alt text rare, keyboard nav broken everywhere. Fast yes, ugly yes, but accessible? That part's revisionist. The attention-as-only-metric bit though, completely agree.
We need this at a conference. Why are people pushing back so heavily when embracing it will bring you greater control over the technologies coming out. Yes AI will replace jobs, what now. Are you just gonna wait you fate or create it. Screw it!
Funny to read this while I'm at the Snowflake summit, where every single vendor booth, keynote talk, and about 95% of tech talks are exclusively about agentic AI. Sometimes I wonder if everyone here is just pretending to like it because they have to, like a tech prostitute telling their investor john that that AI feature is the best they've ever had, it's so good. During Tuesday's keynote, one of the speakers kept getting salty that people weren't really clapping a lot, which was the only amusing part of a slog of a keynote that opened with an AI assisted DJ making "music" that might be fit for phone hold music, if that.
I don't even categorically hate AI. I just wish I could stop fucking hearing about it. These people killed their golden goose (shitty SaaS companies that feed into the giant human centipede of tech stacks that usually just ends up being ad tech at the top) and seem really pumped about it somehow.
My company has some products that are SaaS-like, insofar as you are basically just paying us for the ability to use our services, and then some that are less SaaS-like insofar as they consist of paying for ongoing work produced by people with extremely sought after expertise. For potential customers in the first category, I'm starting to see them say, we're deciding between you, company X, company Y, and building it ourselves with AI. It's actually now a concern that any proof of value engagements will involve them just scanning the APIs and workflows to use as references for their LLM agents. Meanwhile our other products are not impacted by this at all and AI just helps them scale workloads.
We might see this die down a bit when people realize that the real reasons you don't just roll it yourself is that (a) you're paying the company to do it right and to be able to use an economy of scale to do it cheaper than you might even be able to yourself and (b) the real cost is not to build it but to maintain it.
I’m getting some serious Frank Grimes vibes here [1]. I think the slop is causing people to lose their minds because the cognitive dissonance they have seeing it proliferate while hating it so much.
Now Im suspecting if it's possible that VCs are part of the money loop, thus they are more than happy to fund as long as you pour enough of the funding back into the "AI ecosystem".
> Here's how open source contributions go down: I clone your repo, point an agent at your test suite, and have it rewrite the whole thing in Rust to a "spec." No copyright infringed, your honor — an agent wrote every line to a clean-room description, and the description was just your code read aloud. The tests were the spec. The spec was theft. Theft was the pipeline.
I know this website is tongue-and-cheek but I did want to address this part. It's seems to be referring to:
I personally don't see re-implementing a project's specification from tests as theft. I also find it morally okay as long as the re-implementers don't lie about the original project (e.g. saying it's the clone to theirs, the original is X times slower when it's not, etc.). Legally, it would also be permissible since re-implementation of a spec, and even an api interface, has been established to be fair use:
But doesn't this collapse if the tests themselves are wrong or incomplete? Clean-room only works if the spec is uncontaminated. If your "spec" is derived from running the original code, you haven't escaped the copyright question — you've just laundered it.
Act sarcastic all you want, that's a killer line. You do care.