> no one cares about forums anymore so trying to innovate in the space is a waste of time
Not sure about that. To me it looks as if Facebook is self sabotaging, for example their local events page is broken and has been for years. FB-the-company seems defunct internally, and if they start fading away (slowly over many 10s of years), maybe forums will make a comeback (slowly). Also, if AIs destroy Reddit, this might be an opportunity for smaller forums that have ways to block boring AIs.
> Any feature you can think of has probably been implemented by someone at some point
In addition to oldest/newest/"best", you can sort top level comments by time descending, and deeper comments by time _ascending_ or by votes — creating a kind of "micro blog feed" where each top level comment is the most recent "micro blog post" — but replies don't have to share the same sort order. "Newest, then popular" and "Newest, then oldest" I call these sort orders.
Also click the "Recent posts" in the upper right corner, to see the most recent comments sorted by time descending.
***
Anyway. There's people who think the hybrid approach you mentioned is an good idea.
Interesting, didn't know about that Github functionality.
I'd like to not depend that much on Github, and instead I'm thinking about having some kind of archival repo where noisy boring historical stuff can be saved (but I'd delete the branches in the main repo). Or renaming historical branches, eg adding an "old/" prefix.
That's interesting, so you keep the branches from before the squash -- but do you also rename them somehow, to show that they're now "frozen historic versions"?
The whole website was apparently AI generated 3 days ago [0], leaves me wondering if this is partly a HN bots upvotes manipulation experiment. Or people here really think an AI gend docs website is top news nowadays? Has the HN demographics changed
When the website is AI generated anyway, why not ask Claude or Gemini directly instead of going to the specs website?
(Maybe it's useful to the author himself, but personally I don't have any reasons to trust the website more than asking an AI myself + asking for references)
I think the AIs don't have enough information about the problem. There's many things those who wrote the prompts forgot to mention. And some of it maybe is tacit knowledge?
Then, it doesn't matter if you add 1000 frontier models -- they still can't generate a good report.
But yes I suppose you can get rid of hallucinated citations though
Aren't you overlooking the main point of the article?, the reason they migrated:
> concurrency — eliminating data races essentially, which we had before. Really gnarly bugs
> this is the one teams report most enthusiastically. The classes of bugs that survive go test -race and reach production (data races, nil dereferences, missed error paths) just don’t compile in Rust. Oncall rotations are typically very boring after a Rust migration. ...
> I hadn’t had to chase down a crash, or some weird multi-threaded race condition, or some of these other things which actually consumed a huge amount of my time before.
(They say at InfluxDb)
That's not a Rust vs. Go slapfight? Instead, sounds like a good judgement to me
Saying the model failed to write a competitive C compiler makes more sense.
I don't think they tried to do that though.
> today's models are not yet able to produce production software without close supervision, even when uncharacteristically good specs and hand-written tests exist.
Blog comments: https://www.talkyard.io/blog-comments, like Disqus but open source + hosting, no ads no tracking.
How HN can be improved: https://www.talkyard.io/-32/how-hacker-news-can-be-improved-3-things
Contact: kajmagnus3 at gmail dot com
meet.hn/city/se-Stockholm
Socials: - github.com/https://github.com/kajmagnus
(I wouldn't say this is my main HN account. I have another, anonymous, which I use more often, but not in the same discussions.)