I wasted like a half hour trying to find decent sources but I guess I don't know how to search the internet anymore.

I think we're betting more than the stock market on AI, even if I can't say for sure how much.

Seems like if the company is really doing great you'd want to retain ownership. Raise from bonds or something. Put simply, if it's valuable why would anyone sell it?

So audiobook genre fiction is reading, but audiobook War and Peace or audiobook The C Programming Language doesn't count. Not for arbitrary gate-keeping reasons, but because reading those books implies a more active form of engagement than marching linearly through it.

Building technology to overcome relatable hardships and frictions is a worthy challenge full of meaning.

Using someone else's technology to erase frictions and hardships from your life can erode meaning.

On my worst days I am convinced programming and technological optimism is a theft of meaning; personal satisfaction at solving a human problem awkwardly mapped to technology, at the expense of users dating, socializing, or consuming with discomfort and therefore the possibility of growth and meaning.

> Views are my own. I have no history with Zig. I’ve never spoken to Andrew Kelley

There are better primary sources to explain what ZSF is trying to achieve with its AI stance. Kelley's rant [0] was a bit much but the ZSF AI Policy [1] and Kelley's interview on it [2] are interesting and informative.

[0]: https://andrewkelley.me/post/my-thoughts-bun-rust-rewrite.ht...

[1]: https://ziglang.org/code-of-conduct/

[2]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqddnwKF8HQ

IMO all the technical arguments and attacks are post-rationalization; different orgs, different contexts, different goals.

I think Kelley saw this, but couldn't resist muddying his point. I give him a pass. The rant [0] is too much, but the addendum about moving on is healthy, and I'd rather the BDFL be too spicy than not spicy enough.

[0]: https://andrewkelley.me/post/my-thoughts-bun-rust-rewrite.ht...

I think "buy this $10,000 box and to easily grant every Macbook Neo on your team safe, private, free AI" could be a real winner.

Zig was the right tool to start, Rust is the right tool to finish.

Making something possible and refining something until it is high security and reliability are different problems. Zig is great, but for a JS runtime, I just don't think that's the best long-term fit.

I fell in love with the silly idea of squeezing 10G NIC + 10G writes (to a 2x12 RAID 10 HDD array) on the thunderbolt bus of my 12 year old macbook pro.

Then I got distracted with the server mb and truenas and ZFS.

I built a 24 TB HDD NAS in a 36 bay chassis for around $1000 all-in: mb, ram, rails, chassis, rack, disks, hba, nic

Awful Watts/TB but the plan is to run it and the GPU rig on solar.

Agreed that separate router and dumb AP is the way. Every time I updated OpenWRT there was some gotcha that created an unexpected headache where I had to rebuild my elaborate configuration from scratch.

I'm not convinced A -> G upgrade paths are tested, only A -> B -> ... -> F -> G but who manually updates with that level of discipline?

I live in an area with three world-class hospitals, still had to wait 16 months to follow-up with a hematologist about bloodwork.

If we aren't going to fix overregulation, undersupply, and insurance, AI is the best the bottom 80% can do for a lot of medical queries too complex for the time and attention they are allotted with the doctor. I see that as a positive.

I'll be really interested to follow what comes out of the Bun team.

I thought this piece was realistic and hopeful:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/06/ai-open-ai-anthrop...

I can't control how the world uses AI, but my family and friends have been using it to start new businesses, finally resolve some long-term medical mysteries, and plan trips they wouldn't have otherwise.

Setting aside a few levels of irony in arguing with arguers on arguing, I think there are multiple framings for arguments. Things go off the rails all the time when neither party is aligned on what kind of argument the current one is.

Programmers and engineers tend to carry around this worldview that every conversation is about correct information or future decision-making, but everyone is operating on different planes. God help you if you go into an argument with the spouse implicitly about acknowledging how your actions made them feel armed with facts and logic about how this is irrelevant because the problem is solved or there is no new action to take.

> We've reached the point where life stops giving us things and starts taking them away

That's how I feel about the internet. Fun while it lasted, but I think AI is going to keep diluting authenticity and intention at scale until that "why bother" feeling reaches critical mass and we try something else. Maybe it will kick more people offline into physical meet-ups and group hobbies.

I'm not totally sure, but it may even be the stupidest of all possible outcomes: they still exist, the cops can't access them, and their only value is selling private information.

You can take notice of beautiful women in public. You cannot take upskirt photos.

You can eavesdrop on a conversation at the park. You cannot put mics under all the benches.

Privacy is a situational continuum of invasiveness. Just because there is no expectation of privacy from the state in using public roads does not mean we should tolerate corporations building profiles analyzing the comings and goings of citizens.

> Third, measure everything. The common view that AI is already leading to lay-offs and raising electricity bills is probably wrong. But without better statistics it is hard to be sure.

Why are they syndicating high school economics papers on AI?

https://users.cs.utah.edu/~elb/folklore/mel.html