As someone who likes a nicely designed report document, slapping a coat of paint on slop output isn’t helpful

But there’s a lot of pressure to get up to speed as a new hire and it’s easy to move fast with AI

This part of your comment is confusing.

The article talks about agents past this period. Yet it seems like you’re saying this article isn’t relevant because it doesn’t?

The more our energy use increases the harder it is to do so.

(I think golf courses - and some pools - are quite wasteful and would support tax incentives around them.)

"A fool and his money are soon parted"

It feels like you could make this response to most articles criticizing a product.

Do you have any feedback on the actual content? Do you disagree?

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49011656

Points: 3

# Comments: 2

I have serious concerns about how quickly this is accelerating and don't trust any of the major players (including Anthropic) to handle these concerns properly.

That might give us more time to think through strategies for handling it as a society.

And that seems fairly balanced. Especially considering polling says more people are worried about AI than excited in the general population

1. Inkling: Our Open-Weights Model [https://thinkingmachines.ai/news/introducing-inkling/]

2. High-Bandwidth Flash offers efficient storage for model weights [https://spectrum.ieee.org/high-bandwidth-flash]

3. Grok Build is open source [https://github.com/xai-org/grok-build]

4. Governments, companies, nonprofits should invest in free, open source AI [pdf] [https://www.siegelendowment.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/07/f...]

5. An Interactive Map of AI [https://artifipedia.com/map]

I would only say the discussion on #3 is particularly negative and as others mentioned Grok has a lot of its own baggage: Elon Musk, recently uploading home directories without asking, making sexual imagery of minors, etc. (https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/jan/22/grok-ai-g...)

---

So a little less than half of the top 10 stories are about AI and only 1 is negative but that one potentially has other factors at play.

Contrast this to how the general public feels about AI:

"A majority of registered voters, 57%, said they believe the risks of AI outweigh its benefits, compared with 34% who said the opposite. What’s more, a plurality of voters view AI negatively ... Just 26% of voters say they have positive feelings about AI, compared with 46% who hold negative views. In fact, the only topics with a lower net positive rating than AI in the NBC News survey were the Democratic Party and Iran."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/poll-majority...

---

Given all that, I would say HN has a more pro-AI bias than the general population. Do you disagree?

This is the place I see AI discussed the most. Admittedly the opinions here are mixed. A lot of people do have negative feelings but there are also a ton of pro-AI comments. There Are huge 600 comment threads about a new model release, weird rants about “Gastown”, constant “Launch HNs” for model wrappers, and people saying writing code by hand is archaic.

This is one of the most pro-AI places I spend time. The other websites I frequent are much more anti-AI and my experience in real life is that most people don’t like what AI is doing to the world (even if they grudgingly find it useful at work.)

It seems like a stretch to call a reimplementation novel.

It worked for a while. There is a GitHub action that you can configure to fail if the PR is too large.

But then we started a new project and I didn’t add it right away since it’s a small team and I figured we could use the honor system.

Since then there have been lots of massive PRs but there’s not much willingness to go back to enforcing the rule because it might slow us down…

It’s frustrating.