You can’t unslop A.I. prose. Once it’s written, the content is poisoned.
“Sure there was a turd in the punch bowl but I did my best to remove it, so you should be able to drink it.”
Nope.
And the technical parts are what matter, saying you did that with A.I. tells me “I don’t care about this part” so what the heck are we even doing here?
Interesting for me it's the opposite. I care about this so I let AI do it since LLM are better writers than the majority of people. I'm not so arrogant to think I'm a writer of that caliber.
Maybe LLMs are better writers than the majority of people, but that's only because the majority of people just don't write. If you have any level of competency, you are a better writer than an LLM, because good writing requires empathy. It required thinking about what the audience knows, what they want to know, what kind of writing they are comfortable with, and so on.
I think Ghostty is great for the most part but I keep going back to iTerm2, personally.
iTerm just feel less buggy. For example I was running Claude in a container the other day and the slash command complete wasn’t rendering properly with Ghostty but worked perfectly fine with iTerm.
I want to switch to Ghostty because I prefer how simple Ghostty is overall and I think the project itself is very cool and an important piece of software (libghostty) but it doesn’t quite get there for _for my use cases_.
I’m so burnt out by being swapped with so much work from AI at my day job that I don’t even want to look at anything with a screen when I’m off anymore.
I despise AI but the thought of doing something the “old way” just makes me wince at how long it would take me to do anything that would take minutes with agents that I despise.
Anthropic keeps nerfing their models to appease entrenched corporate overlords and it takes 5 seconds to switch to Deepseek or GLM. Can’t even use Claude to protect yourself against a cyber attack from a Chinese model based attacker for “safety”. What a joke.
Nerfed, proprietary models have have no future and these trillion dollar valuations are laughable.
From what I understand, it is mostly the very rigid and prescriptive attitude which the average reader gets from his book, which, if you listen to him talk, was not his intent. He even published a new 2025 edition of “Clean Code” to try and fix this, by making the text less self-assured. So while he may or may not be responsible, he did not intend it.
I’m not who you were replying to, but there was a thread here a couple of years ago in which many people chimed in with examples. I added my two cents here, but the whole discussion is much more worth reading than my gripes: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43166836
> All text and content submitted to our project, which includes code, descriptions, issues, and comments, must be human written.
> The use of GitHub Copilot and other assistive AI technologies is heavily discouraged.
> Low-effort or incorrect submissions that are determined to have been generated by, or created with aid of such systems may lead to a ban from contributing to the repository or project as a whole.
reply