> Accessibility doesn't matter when the content is engineered to be inaccessible to thought.

Act sarcastic all you want, that's a killer line. You do care.

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.

Plot twist, it was artisanally typed in emacs.

This is great satire. If you read it as a parody it's uncomfortable, if you read it straight it's uncomfortable but in a different way.

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.

Why is this so good?

Probably because someone still cared a lot about the bit! And wow this is really quite good lol.

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!

Nice work IMHO!

> 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

that's what our ai landlords want. i will give them that, and a few years later i will resell them the cure.

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!

One starts wondering, is farming one of my strengths, is it something else.

As many says if AI does the creative part then I do the dishes, as opposite why we built computers for. Looks like we will be serving AI.

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.

Very good. A viable if any longwinded ode to the original. Which in itself is very fitting.

As the owner of https://thebestmotherfucking.website/ - I approve

> Keep the dependency tree shallow — mine has a node_modules with its own gravity. Light bends around it.

Love that one. This LLM is fucking funny.

That was a fantastic read

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.

[1] https://youtu.be/0uqGKCDV1j8?si=JxQq2s5EbwzqMKjn

undefined

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".

Someone gotta send a patch to that email lol

No BS. No Fluff.

> 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:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47257803

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:

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/04/05/google-oracle-supre...