If you step one step outside your ego for a moment, and see the world from a place of connectedness and unity rather than individual achievement and putting your name on things, you won't have to be sad about a statement like this.
What is connected when my LLM, extrapolating from a vague prompt about a cool liquid effect, takes this method and reproduces it without acknowledging the original author? Certainly not me and the author.
Using connectedness and unity to defend the fragmentation of the social bond is ironic, to say the least.
The information you produced (probably aided by your LLM), was used by another human (and probably their LLM).
Historically, like little children who find it hard to find intrinsic self-encouragement and value, many people needed to have a pat on their back for their work "hey good job buddy you made it first".
If you still need this, its okay, we all grow up some day and start making things for the sakes of it (giving back to the community, etc), but this is not something inherent to the human but is rather a learned ego-seeking.
The author explicitly said this is pre llm work so not "aided by [an] LLM". And it seems some don't see llms ingesting their work as their preferred mode of giving back to the community.
"I don't prefer LLMs to ingest my work so I will sit in my own sandbox alone with my discoveries while the rest of the world moves on with research and making cool stuff".
Cat is out of the bag my dude, you can't stop this, adapt.
Next time someone wants to make a spreading liquid effect, their LLM is more likely to know how to make it. They won't have to read this work when looking for references, won't get to know the person who thought of this and shared it with the world.
Surely it's at least understandable why the author could be feeling a bit sad about it?
If I made something for fun, for the public, for free, and it exploded into common use, I would be super happy that I made something useful. But, I also always license any software I write (outside of work) as public domain like.
We are social creatures, and wanting to impress fellow beings is part of the reason why we do original things.
When you made something public domain pre-LLMs, you generally could expect people to give kudos to you.
With LLMs, if you make something public and an LLM gobbles it up, not only you get zero credit but you also can’t convincingly claim to have come up with it (since anyone can just assume you used an LLM), and neither can anyone else (even if they have come up with it fully independently).
If you don’t seek any recognition for your original work, then that’s fine, but I suspect you might be in a minority.
I mean if information is decentralized, this is not far from the truth. Historically attribution was given because you could synthesize or create information in a way others could not, and it was useful to be able to trace things back to the source.
Now everyone can create everything, and the source is shared. You are adding to the pile of human knowledge and it gets processesed, that's it.
If you step aside and think about it from a holistic perspective, imagine a research project to find a cure for cancer, or the best compression algorithm, or whatever.
Who will find the solution faster:
1) Entities work in isolation, produce their results, gets attribution, and then it's integrated into other work.
2) Entities work in parallel, dumping their findings and work into a big pile that is continuously parsed and built upon.
The second approach does not discriminate partial or bad results, it does not place value on a specific contribution. It might be that two entities did partial solutions that only make sense together, and this is able to be synthesized on the fly.
The point of foldables is that they fit a big screen in your pocket. What's the point of a foldable display? Fit a 10 inch in your tiny purse? Very hard sale for double the price.
We will eventually see "foldable MacBook" because I genuinely want a 20" screen in my backpack or even just a smaller 16" MacBook. I guess not coming before 2035
It makes me think of a Bento-box laptop with a foldable keyboard and a tri-fold display, where both the display and the keyboard unfold when you open the computer. Extremely thick, but a very small footprint when closed.
I'm not sure whether that's amazing or something that'll bankrupt any company that tries to sell it with longer than a 3-day warranty.
"We just changed a couple things, no biggie, don't buy it" is the reality, but that doesn't sell. Marketers optimize for sales saying what they can get away with.
Im not, its like everyone is using the same font/color/layout. Like they dont even take a second to change the generic color palette all these llms output.
These styles only change after a model gets updated, then they all start having a different font, some cursive red font and a beige background maybe.
I knew what this site was going to look like before I clicked the link.
Its so ugly and unoriginal, I assume the content/information trying to be communicated lacks any sort of expertise or original insights.
Yesterday these topics went viral and this guy used some llm to farm engagement. It was literally built to get attention for a singular day after this topic went viral. It will not exist in 3 months.
Edit. Its actually an attempt to bandwagon jump ontp a viral topic and sell $150 ad spots and probably to promote their own $299 club for vibecoders.
I found that if you make the base styling and components, and then vibecode the layout/content, you get better results than letting the LLM make the base itself.
Obviously if your base is just unmodified shadcn, then it will look like any other toy site out there.
Seriously - why can't the browsers just natively support a common UI component framework. Its 2026 and they still haven't done it. That old excuse of: webtech needs individual flair and diversity is now a fraudulent argument considering that everyone uses Claude to generate the same look and feel everywhere.
Might as well get it natively supported in the browser.
Until Google and Apple agree to create a new "web app" standard, it's not gonna happen HTML moves painfully slow. Then solutions come out (input datetime) and people don't use them.
reply