[embedding-shape]

See what coming?! I really don't understand what's going on here. Correctly predicted what, that Bun was being rewritten into Rust? I'm not sure anyone doubted that, all the work they did was public???

What on earth is going on here?

[BoorishBears]

It's really simple.

9 days ago this is how the migration was described:

> I work on Bun and this is my branch

> This whole thread is an overreaction. 302 comments about code that does not work. We haven’t committed to rewriting. There’s a very high chance all this code gets thrown out completely.

> I’m curious to see what a working version of this looks, what it feels like, how it performs and if/how hard it’d be to get it to pass Bun’s test suite and be maintainable. I’d like to be able to compare a viable Rust version and a Zig version side by side.

9 days after that comment, the rewrite has been merged to master.

9 days after "this is my branch" "the code doesn't work" "I'm just curious" "high chance it's thrown out"... it's merged to master.

-

Some people saw the original as an attempt to downplay the importance of the branch in response to negative feedback, rather than accurately describing what the branch represented.

Those people essentially predicted that Bun's actions would shortly reflect much more conviction than was being let on.

Experiments graduate to production all the time, but given the timelines involved, their predictions were correct.

[antonvs]

> Those people essentially predicted that Bun's actions would shortly reflect much more conviction than was being let on.

Ironically these people are displaying great confidence in AI’s abilities.

If that’s the case, what are they objecting to exactly?

[lelanthran]

> Ironically these people are displaying great confidence in AI’s abilities.

Maybe they were displaying high confidence in a marketing machine's ability to commit to dangerous stunts.

[famouswaffles]

Stop thinking about '9 days' like it means the same thing in an era where machines can generate thousands of lines of code in a few hours.

There is no way a human rewrite like this wouldn't be roughly at the same stage with a 9 day delta. In that case, some of these accusations would be reasonable to make. But that is not the case here.

[geodel]

Thats fine if some Claude code agent made PR and committed it. No human involved, no human drama ensued.

People here are pointing the problem because Anthropic dude claimed, it is an experiment, tests are still failing, may go nowhere.. blah..blah.

[famouswaffles]

Yes because it was an experiment and tests were indeed failing at that point in time, but guess what ? When an experiment succeeds you probably don't throw away the results.

[BoorishBears]

You know, we used to look down on engineers who didn't realize there's more to software than the raw lines of code.

[famouswaffles]

You're free to look down on whoever you want. I'm free to tell you I couldn't care less, and that both replies so far just confirm how much of an emotional meltdown the reactions here really are. Your comment has managed to have nothing to do with the point I was making.

[BoorishBears]

You're getting the responses you earned by intentionally being flippant as possible.

If you had presented your point more thoughtfully, maybe I'd have spoon fed the point of my response, which 100% relates to what you said: your model of time compression is describing the speed of creating code.

But Bun is more than lines of code and serves as core infrastructure for lots of other projects. It's a terrible look in terms of governance to approach this migration as they have, especially the initial denial.

That shouldn't be contentious.

[famouswaffles]

There's no reason to think there was an 'initial denial'. That's the point. Everyone here is saying there was denial because all of this happened in 9 days, and again, that's a silly assertion to make when humans did not create or review the code. Someone can have a swift turn in opinion when an incredible amount of change happens in a short time. The LoC comment I made was simply to serve as an illustration to how fast things can change with LLM generated code.

I'm being flippant because this should be incredibly easy to understand.

[fragmede]

Just because the machines can generate code that quickly doesn't mean that human thought has changed to moving faster. Everyone's had a problem they were working on, and the solution doesn't come sitting at the desk staring at the code, but three days later in the shower, eureka! hits. Just because machines are writing code hasn't changed the underlying human thought speed substrate. That's why people see nine days as too fast, even in this sped up AI era.

[famouswaffles]

Human speed thought doesn't matter here because it's not human reviewed. The code was generated. It exists and it (now) works to the extent they're satisfied with going through with a canary release. Going on about about '9 days' is working with a mental model that simply does not apply here. That is my point.

If you think there should be human review or that there should have been a lot more human collaboration, that's one thing but accusing Jarred of lying about his intentions is another thing entirely, and one where '9 days' is not remotely the proof people think it is in this situation.

[fragmede]

I'm not sure where I accused Jarred of lying. All I'm saying is that 9 days is not very long.

[famouswaffles]

The chain we're on and the comments I originally responded to have such concerns. And I mean, if it's not going to be reviewed by humans then really what makes 9 days too soon ? Should the code just sit there collecting dust until everyone agrees an arbitrary amount of time has passed ?

[wiseowise]

> I'm not sure anyone doubted that, all the work they did was public???

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48019226

> This whole thread is an overreaction. 302 comments about code that does not work. We haven’t committed to rewriting. There’s a very high chance all this code gets thrown out completely.

[grayhatter]

> What on earth is going on here?

With the nearly complete PR with the port to rust, a number of people predicted that it was going to happen. They were assured it's unlikely to happen and then they were accused of overreacting over effectively nothing. When those same people who were already upset about the rewrite, learned that their predictions the same ones that were rudely dismissed, were in fact, correct, they became upset again; this time about being lied to.

Correct or not, it's reasonable to conclude they were lied to. Especially given they correctly predicted the future.

[famouswaffles]

>Correct or not, it's reasonable to conclude they were lied to.

No it's not. If we were 9 days away from a human written version of this experiment then yeah it would be reasonable to conclude they were lied to, because a human written version would progress so much slower and steadier that it's very unlikely you hadn't made up most of your mind a week before merge time.

But it's not human written. It's months, perhaps years of work compressed into a week, where the machine can go from 'nothing is working' to 'everything is working' in a few days. There is nothing reasonable about concluding you must have been lied to when such a delta in such a short time is possible. And if people fail to see that, then perhaps the initial assertions about an emotional meltdown were not so far off after all.

[wiseowise]

I might surprise you, but tech projects have social part of it. Decisions like that are discussed with community. It is completely fine to not give a single shit about community, but then don't act surprised when community doesn't give a shit about you.

[famouswaffles]

Decisions like this are discussed however the maintainers of the project wish to discuss them. And a majority of the time, these decisions are made and discussed solely by the maintainers, so I really have no idea what you're talking about.

[antonvs]

> What on earth is going on here?

Irrational armchair quarterbacking driven by emotional reactions to change and perceived threats. It’s not worth worrying about this specific instance, but the overall trends could get messy. This is just a taste of that.