tappio

A lot of people criticizing because it's heavily written with LLM, but I mean, if someone produced this piece pre-LLM, would they criticize it? is the critique due to use of LLM or due to the content being truly hard to follow? I read it and I would say, there are some problems with the writing, but its not a bad piece.

Of course this is a bigger problem, as its now harder to distinguish content that is "AI slop" with "content co-authored with AI that is carefully reviewed" with a quick glimpse, and the "AI smell" is quite off-putting. My initial reaction was also negative, but after glimpsing it through and reading the summaries, I found it decent summary, which also... speaks of this thread, of the content of the blog post and everything about the discussion and the strong feelings people have developed around the use of LLMs.

Anyhow, it would be good to disclose the repo with the code for the statistics & use of LLM in the writing right up front. Which model, and why it was used to do the writing, etc. Its enough to say "I think it writes better than I do" or "I was in a hurry, sorry" or what ever, but it really should be disclosed. It reads more honest.

ps. really... that sideways scroll? plz fix it.

Maximizing profit for the corporation is the goal of any corporation by law, isn't it? Apparently not in the US, but for example the Finnish law explicitly states that the goal of a corporation is to generate profits for the shareholders. If you for example give away company assets for free, it can be considered breaking the law.

This probably is just culturally different understanding of the phrase, because US corporations indeed feel to act greedy, and there is no similar level of protection of the employees.

However, the thing is, in the long term, the business has to make profits to be sustainable. If the company does not make profits, it will die. Its the short term thinking that breaks down companies. You can maximize profits and be ethical at the same time, if the goal is to do it in the long term.

I do understand that the "maximizing profit for the corporation" is a synonym often for short term thinking and vulture capitalism, but for me it meant something else. This is actually quite fascinating now that I think of it, because this phrase means completely different things in different cultural contexts.

So I guess the trigger is that "maximize short term profits over long term sustainability" is the kind of company where I'd never work for.

I have used past week opencode go with deepseek v4 pro and claude code with opus 4.7 side by side and... they are both good. They are different, both have their good and bad sides... but they do get things done. Especially the OpenCode has been very enjoyable experience. Thank you Anthropic for all the down time, I would have probably not explored alternatives otherwise. I can vouch for the OpenCode Go sub!

For some personal projects in the past I have used google sheets and cloudflare workers, I guess it could be called CMS, but it was quite restricted of course.

This project has a "shared" backend for the content management and its completely self built. Because there are many clients who use it to edit things its feasible to pay for the hosting.

For a solo project, id be quite interested if someone would build a native editor that can be just hooked with git, so it would make it possible to run the site serverless. Maybe one already exists. "IDE" for static websites.

NASA, White House, and which ever large organizations do not represent the most of the web.

When you have complexity, multiple non techincal users who need to update content, and frequent changes, a CMS is currently a very good solution. But thats just a small fraction of websites.

Most of websites are small, 1-2 person companies websites, non-profts, etc., that are basically business cards. Contact details, possibly a contact form, and few pictures. Thats it. There are likely at least hundred milloin websites like that, which are infrequently updated.

Majority of those sites are powered by WP and various site builders, which is far more complicated than what they need. There has not been good option for non-techincal users that makes it possible to make good looking and functional sites.

Also, please keep it civil. This is not Facebook. People can have different opinions.

I have built a product which uses AI to built Astro sites. LLM builds the sites in steps and make sure that they get 100/100 scores in pagespeed insights. These sites are served with a CDN. You can edit the sites with LLM interface, or use markdown editor to edit sites, or edit texts directly on a dashboard. These sites are static. There is no vendor lock in. If you want to migrate and manage yourself, just go to cloudflare or github pages. These sites cost 0 eur to run, and they always score better in all benchmarks compared to sites that are built on top of a separate CMS server.

I know WordPress is going nowehere and if there is some special backend functionality, that is needed. But 95% of web does not need it.

A static site is always cheaper, and the bottleneck has always been that editing code is indimidating. Therefore, AI actually resolves a big problem here, and this is going to alter the future of platforms like WP.

The limits in the max subscriptions are more generous and power users are generating loss.

I'm rather certain, though cannot prove it, that buying the same tokens would cost at least 10x more if bought from API. Anecdotally, my cursor team usage was getting to around 700$ / month. After switching to claude code max, I have so far only once hit the 3h limit window on the 100$ sub.

What Im thinking is that Anthropic is making loss with users who use it a lot, but there are a lot of users who pay for max, but don't actually use it.

With the recent improvements and increase of popularity in projects like OpenClaw, the number of users that are generating loss has probably massively increased.

This is a false assumption. We will only know retrospectively whether it was valuable or not.

1. She gets better all the time, and might be super popular in the future 2. Many writings became relevant only long after the death of the author

This is not my experience any longer. With properly set feedback loop and frameworks documentation it does not seem to matter much if they are working with completely novel stuff or not. Of course, when that is not available they hallucinate, but who anymore does that even? Anyone can see that LLMs are just glorified auto-complete machines, so you really have to put a lot of work in the enviroment they operate and quick feedback loops. (Just like with 90% of developers made of flesh...)

I've came across llms.txt files in few services. I don't know how the agents.md compares to the llms.txt files, but I guess they could pretty much have the same content. See more also here https://llmstxt.org/

Anyhow, I have made few interesting observations, that might be true for the agents.md also:

Agents have trouble with these large documents, and they seem to miss many relevant nuances. However, its rather easy to point them to the right direction when all relevant information is in one file.

Another thing is that I personally prefer this style of documentation. I can just ctrl+f and find relevant information, rather than using some built in search and trying to read through documents. I feel that the UX of one large .txt file is better than the documentation scattered between multiple pages using some pretty documentation engine.

Tokyo might not be the best example. Shanghai, Peking, Moscow, as per my experience, there is a risk of getting stuck for 2+ hours with car. Even if it was faster sometimes by car, there is a risk of getting completely stuck.

I feel that it is a commom thing. You just have to "keep an eye on it". There are several failure modes with Claude. Maybe the most annoying is that it often uses kind of defensive programming, so it is harder to detect that there is a fatal mistake somewhere. It can hide those really well. And it loves to fix linter issues with any type in typescript.

Im using it regardless. Ive just learnt to deal with these and keep an eye on them. When it creates a duplicate interface I roll back to earlier prompt and be more explicit that this type already exists.

I try to not argue whether something it does is wrong or right. There is not point. I will simply rollback and try with another prompt. Claude is not a human.

Thank you for the hard work in this space! I think it is really important that there is a proper open source solution available.

I just found OptaPlanner and subsequently TimeFold few months ago, as I was searching for a solution for my wife's veterinary clinics employee scheduling problem. The problem is not big enough for anyone to pay for the solution, but big enough to cause stress for whom ever is dealing with manually doings the shifts.

It was interesting that there were a lot of online SaaS providers that claim to solve the problem but they just simply are not configurable for all kinds of constraints of a real workplace.

Unfortunately I also feel partially same with TimeFold, because designing those constraints really requires changing the way of thinking of many problems. While the engine is capable of doing what ever, there is a steep learning curve to do it.

So while the article mentions documentation, I would say that the documentation is far from sufficient for wide adaption.

Personally, I would have really needed documentation about a mental model of thinking about the problem, and then a ton of examples how to solve real employee scheduling problems. Problem written in a format which the business people use and then translated into an elegant constraint rule explained step by step.

I had to invest more than 40 hours to get a working MVP that solves real problems, not just those that are already coded in the example code. Most people are not willing to do that.

What I'm trying to say is that to making planner software popular, it should be also usable for trivial projects. I understand that it's hard to focus on everything, but just providing more information about real use cases and how they were solved and how to think about the design problems would make the market bigger, and bring you a lot more customers in the long run.

I just wonder how I might contribute to improve the documentation. I probably don't have deep enough understanding of the correct solution, but I will look into it.

All is see here is that finding good people is difficult?

Being C level exec in another firm does not guarantee success. In fact, it might even be a dismerit for a startup.

I've never heard that hearing. I've been living in multiple houses heated primarily with a heat pump in the winter during average temperature of minus 10 Celsius, ranging from 0 to -30.

My current garage has radiators installed but I've never used them as the heat pump is just fine.

I guess they must build the houses or heat pumps differently where you live!

We just launched a MVP for pdf data extraction https://excelifier.com/. The service is not open source and relies on open ai, which is probably a bit problematic in your case.

However, we understand that privacy concerns are really important for many organizations. Making it self-hostable and depend on a locally running LLM is something that we are looking into.

Institutions try to preserve themselves.

Sometimes it leads to suggested outcome, sometimes they evolve into something else.

This is just so right. Very eloquently put.

People just want to believe that humans are far more exceptional than we really are. These theories rest on the assumption that this 'elite' can predict the future. That there is no randomness in the world. That they are so smart and capable that they can just manipulate everyone. The truth is -- the individuals which make up the elite are just as clueless as everyone else. Furthermore, majority of them behave with good intentions. It is no surprise that no one really knows who represents the "elite". Once you dig deeper into the personality of each individual, you realise that they are just normal people. Often very selfish, but not much different from average Joe.

The problems that we see and blame the elite, god, what ever for, are due to systems we have created. Institutions, culture, feedback loops; everything that exists when large groups of individuals exist together.

We are privileged with my wife. Our combined workload is ~7 days per week, and our two kids are in the kindergarten 4 days per week. I work usually 3 days and my wife 4. This is not possible for most families, but I can highly recommend cutting the total hours if possible.

Sounds very similar for me. It is pretty annoying sometimes, especially on remote meetings. I think it is some kind of ADHD tendency.

My comment came out quite black and white, the reality is of course very nuanced. I personally have hard time focusing. Even if I find the topic interesting I'm constantly switching attention, unless there is a strong immersion, like with development work.

My point was just that the "life hacks" of learning are quite useless if you are not interested or disciplined in the first place, and if you are... you unlikely need them. At least my personal experience is that when the topic is interesting and I have motivation, I usually "find a way" to learn more.

Learning takes a lot of effort. There are no shortcuts. To put effort into learning something, you need discipline and/or motivation. Biggest problem with learning for me has always been finding the motivation. When I'm motivated I'm switching between all the mentioned "learning methods". Also, the best suitable method depends on the topic too. And finally... I've always hated lectures, and have had a bad tendency to fall asleep... expect when I'm motivated and the topic is interesting!

The author is looking at the topic from a quite narrow perspective. The reasoning 'why' what he observed is happening could be due many other reasons. I think he also misunderstood some fundamental reasons why school exists in the first place, such as functioning as a "day care" for bigger kids allowing parents to work.

The article is based on an assumption of why something was done. It is positioned in a way that it immediately invokes a reaction "how can they be this stupid". But... What if that is not what those who made these decisions actually think? If he just assumes that is the case?

I'm no expert, but maybe it would help here to do a thought experiment of "what I might be missing from the puzzle?".

Lack of resources is one thing that was mentioned here. It is not that they drop the class and do nothing else. So what was the alternative? Where are the resources put now?

I'm quite sure there are other things we are missing too. I'd like to step into those people's shoes who are making the decisions to understand better why they chose what they chose, instead of assuming what they think.

Of course, if the goal is to actually improve equality, it is really stupid. Somehow I just doubt people are that dumb. There must be something more to it that I'm missing.

Ideally, it could also be great source of tax income, which could be further used to help people get rid of drugs.

I think your last sentence hits the nail.

We have to remember that "we" have selected the best of bad options. This system is not good and will get worse by time. People have to remember that we must not let power accumulate to specific groups, be it private or public sector. Unfortunately the tendency seems to be towards the opposite of what is "good" for average individuals. If government has too much power it cannot be held accountable, and the interests have disaligned.

This may be true in theory, but we are seeing rather different development in the West. 1) power seems to have a tendency to concentrate, which ultimately leads to corporate oligarchy. 2) most markets have high barrier to entry which breaks the alignment of market and interests 3) the concept of rational markets is not as clear cut as it is often perceived, and most studies have failed to incorporate findings from related to bounded rationality

However, the government's incentive is to stay in power and not let that happen. The tool that government has is regulation.

Try Facebook, I've spent some time trying to make it work but figured out I can do what I need by using Bing API instead and get structured data...

You are right, but I feel you misunderstood op.

I understood that op meant increase number of samples, not variables.

This is quite funny. We have a group of friends really obsessed with making great food. We cook together menus with top notch ingredients retrieved from local sources, spending days studying recipes and planning menus and practicing each step. I love to make great foods for any friends who visit, if I can make time into my calendar. At the same time, we also share all possible hacks for making fast and efficient foods, sharing information which ready made canned things taste good and which not. Never discarding something because it's not "pure". Some processed goods and premade meals are amazing! Everything has their time and place. Being food snob 24/7 must be super exhausting. It has its time and place, sure, but most of the time I want something tasty with minimal effort.

I agree. I actually pointed out in another comment that the term social media does not make any sense. Everyone has a different definition of social media. We can't really generalize findings on all platforms. The studies focusing on social media are often missing that it does not really make any sense to use that word. Are Twitter and Facebook the same? Can we generalize findings on one to another? No we can't. Talking about "social media" this way does not make much sense. It also hides out the fact that in the end everything is about the internet and digital content, together forming the new mass medium which is actually the relevant unifying factor. I'm glad you picked that up!

The studies focusing on social media are a bit dummy. I'm doing a PhD on the topic and I too feel like a dummy. Everyone has a different definition of social media, but we can't really generalize findings on all platforms. The studies should focus on services with their names, but then they would be less interesting. Are Twitter and Facebook the same? Can we generalize findings on one to another? No we can't. Besides, is HN a social media platform? Or Reddit? Talking about social media does not make much sense. It also hides out the fact that in the end everything is about the internet and digital content, together forming the new mass medium which is taking the world by storm.