A desktop made for one
238 points
10 hours ago
| 26 comments
| isene.org
| HN
redfloatplane
8 hours ago
[-]
I (and I'm sure many others) have been thinking about this a lot over the last couple of months. I called it "Extremely Personal Software" in a blog post a few months ago (https://redfloatplane.lol/blog/14-releasing-software-now/) but there are lots of names and concepts floating about for the same basic idea.

I think it's possible the amount of new software that will be written for an audience of 1-10 will be greater in 2026 than in any previous year, and then the same again for many years to come. I also think a lot of this software will be essentially 'hidden' - people just writing this stuff for themselves because the cost to say things to an agent is very low compared with the cost of actually planning out a software design and so forth.

Interoperability will probably be important in the next few years and I wonder if this is something solvable at the agent/LLM level (standing instructions like 'typically, use sqlite, use plaintext, use open standards' or whatever). I also think observability and ops will be pretty important - many people who want personal software but don't care for the maintenance and upkeep.

reply
Agingcoder
6 hours ago
[-]
Agreed I’ve already started writing software for myself using Claude. I would never have done this if it weren’t for AI - I simply don’t have the time otherwise .

I now have tailor made apps with all kinds of bells and whistles that commercial products can’t offer easily ( I fall under non commercial usage which opens a lot of doors ), and that free software might offer, but later.

I have also learnt a lot technically in the process, since I’ve been able to venture into what was for me unknown territory but at controlled cost

I plan to create more such apps in the future. What is certain though is that my cooking app has immediately displaced all the others on the market , because none of the others cater to my requirements.

The production side is indeed of specific interest - most users don’t run production software so I had to think about that one. Tailscale and Cloudflare came in quite handy and there is indeed a market here

reply
nz
3 hours ago
[-]
I don't know how to tell you this, but people have been writing custom software for personal use for decades. I've been doing it since at least 2009! I find it hard to believe that there is a demographic of people that were yearning to write code, but simply could not because they lacked LLMs. Is it the price? Are people simply too cheap to buy books? Or have they simply "forgotten" how to patiently and thoughtfully read them? Or has the quality of tutorials/documentation of languages/libraries/framework online decayed in the last decade? Or is it really that people have struggled to type characters of code into their text editors[1]?

Basically, I am prepared to accept that there is a friction that LLMs lubricate away, but what is the source of the friction, and why am I (and a bunch of other colleagues) not feeling that friction daily in our practice?

[1]: And if so, where did we programmers and computer scientists go wrong? Were subroutines and macros not sufficient for automating all of that excess typing? Were Emacs and Vim simply not saving enough keystrokes? Did people forget how to touch-type?

reply
mrob
2 hours ago
[-]
I still vaguely remember how difficult man pages were to understand when I first started reading them. I'm pretty sure the biggest obstacle is the fact that most documentation is written for people who already know the standard computer science terminology. I have a generally negative opinion of LLMs, but one thing they do very well is function as a "reverse dictionary". You can input a idiosyncratic description of something you want and get the standard terminology. This is a new and valuable capability.
reply
nz
1 hour ago
[-]
There is a universe out there, where most of the world is reading Solaris man pages, instead of Linux man pages. Whatever your thoughts on the Solaris OS, I think it is fair to say that no operating system has ever matched the quality of its man pages.

Interestingly, I also converged on the "reverse dictionary" usage of LLMs, in around 2024[1], mostly to indulge in (human) language-learning.

An excerpt from the post below:

``` It is a phenomenal reverse dictionary (i.e. which English words mean "of a specific but unspecified character, quality, or degree"). It not only works for English, but also for Esperanto (i.e. which Esperanto words mean "of a specific but unspecified character, quality, or degree"), as well as my own obscure native language. This is a huge time-saver when learning languages (normal dictionaries won't cut it, and bi-lingual dictionaries are limited, if they are available at all). Even if you are just using a language you are fluent in, a reverse-dictionary-prompt can help you find words and usages, and can also help you find "dark spots" in the language's lexicon. ```

[1]: https://galacticbeyond.com/chat-room-dispatches-intelligence...

reply
wyclif
29 minutes ago
[-]
I've commented on this subject before, but the fact of the matter is that kids getting into high tech and programming mostly don't read books anymore. How do I know? Recently I was hanging out with a bunch of high school students who asked me how I learned. I said it was mostly via books and man pages. "Yeah, don't sleep on high quality written material. O'Reilly. Wiley. Addison-Wesley. Manning. MIT. No Starch Press. &c..."

Well. You should have seen the look on their faces. I might as well have morphed into the Steve Buscemi meme "How do you do, fellow kids?" They looked at me like I was a total relic or greybeard and said things like "Nah, nobody reads tech books anymore; I learned Typescript from YouTube videos."

reply
eichin
2 hours ago
[-]
Given how often younger people find my typing speed startling, I think it has been somewhat forgotten (US high schools had "keyboarding" classes at one point but that seems to have fallen off...)
reply
morganf
2 hours ago
[-]
Seriously agree. I am wildly overeducated and I often think the most useful class I ever took in high school was my senior year elective for a typing class. On old IBM typewriters. And the only class I took in high school with non-honors kids. Typing insanely fast, especially for someone who is a fast thinker, is a bit of a magic power in itself.
reply
taude
2 hours ago
[-]
Not speaking for the OP. But my biggest constraint is time. Now with agentic coding, I can work in 5 to 15 minute bursts a few times/day, and make meaningful progress on projects, where as before I would have never been able to context shift from my day job long enough on a personal project.
reply
SmirkingRevenge
2 hours ago
[-]
Speaking for myself, it's less of a yearning to write more code, than it is a yearning for tools that work a specific way.

I write plenty of code at my job, and generally don't have the desire to write more code as a hobby, except in rare cases when the mood really strikes.

reply
quietthrow
2 hours ago
[-]
This. I have written so much software recently to make my computer my own. It’s been so much fun to be able to borrow the the ideas from different tools I have used (eg vim modal behaviours etc ) and also bring them together with some completely novel ideas to produce tools for myself that are one of a kind and that “fits me like a glove“

Too bad this is all on the work computer and need to bring it to my personal one but can’t copy paste lol. It’s been thrilling building g and using them and the time from an ideating a small enhancement/ optimization to actually using it is like 5 to 15 minutes away. Soo cool.

reply
vessenes
6 hours ago
[-]
I had the same reaction. We're headed into a period where you can shape your tools exactly as you like them; artisanal rather than factory-created workshops, essentially.

I think the instinct that APIs, validation layers, and so on take on a much higher importance is right.. I have a few internal tools that made sense to make libraries out of, and once the first library is good, and a test suite is comprehensive, porting to a bunch of different languages is extremely simple.

Everting that, it's also going to be simple for someone to hook up to this library with custom tooling.

Really interesting period in computing, for sure.

reply
blks
2 hours ago
[-]
> We're headed into a period where you can shape your tools exactly as you like the

What period were we for the past 50 years?

reply
chrisweekly
4 hours ago
[-]
"Everting"?
reply
vessenes
1 hour ago
[-]
I learned it in the math context - a sphere eversion is a 3 dimensional process that ends with the inside of the sphere becoming the outside.
reply
setopt
3 hours ago
[-]
I had to check it up too. Appears to be a synonym for "inverting" used in some fields like biology and medicine.
reply
dannyfritz07
2 hours ago
[-]
Reminds me of this blog post and conference presentation on home cooked software by Maggie Appleton.

https://maggieappleton.com/home-cooked-software

reply
geir_isene
8 hours ago
[-]
A really good and thoughtful response. Thanks.
reply
sandworm101
5 hours ago
[-]
I shudder to think about the security implications of everyone rolling thier own software. I trust my OS/browser/file system is secure because thousands of people are invovled in a complex network of interests in keeping it secure, from the kid contributing his first bit of code to the PHds at NSA writing encryption standards. The idea that any one person can replace that network is laughable.
reply
jpease
4 hours ago
[-]
Just to be contrarian, perhaps some measure of risk is reduced by the scale of one.

Identifying a vulnerability that can be exploited against many thousands or millions of targets is perhaps more attractive than a single one of individually low value.

This of course would assume that vulnerabilities are in fact unique (which is admittedly questionable).

reply
tonyarkles
4 hours ago
[-]
I had the exact same thought. Pretty low probability that there's going to be a script-kiddie exploit for your custom tools. Pretty decent probability that there will be vulnerabilities present if someone cares enough to target you.
reply
girvo
3 hours ago
[-]
The counterpoint to that is that the exact same tools that are allowing this personal software creation at massive scale are also excellent at black box vulnerability analysis…
reply
iugtmkbdfil834
3 hours ago
[-]
Otoh, TAU will bound to get really personal now:D
reply
9dev
5 hours ago
[-]
That seems like a naive view to me. Most modern software development is gluing vendor code and libraries into a CRUD app, and I don't see why that would change with agents doing the majority of programming. If anything, there's an even bigger market for solid libraries and interoperability, plugging things together like LEGO - only for real this time.
reply
vidarh
7 hours ago
[-]
While I wouldn't do asm, I love the approach and do much the same myself but in Ruby instead.

My wm, shell, terminal, editor, file manager, pop-up menu (dmenu-like) are all pure ruby (including font rendering and X11 bindings). These all started before I started using Claude to improve them, so they're still mostly hand-written, but that is changing.

They're messy, they have bugs and "misfeatures" that works for me but likely would be painful for others.

Like OP, I don't really recommend anyone else use my code, at least not directly, and that is extremely liberating.

Overall, the projects covers the largest surface of what I use beyond the kernel, a browser, and Xorg (I'm so, so tempted, but I think an LLM will need to get a lot further first before I could fit it into my schedule).

It doesn't need to be polished because it's mostly for me. It's okay for them to have bugs as long as they work better for me than the alternatives.

I strongly believe more people should do this. It's both a great learning experience, and it gives you a system that has exactly the features you actually want and use.

And it's only going to get easier to do this.

reply
nine_k
8 hours ago
[-]
This is very cool. I wonder how much time did it actually take, and how much did it cost, because Clause Code is very much not free [1] [2]. It's more like hiring a robotic contractor, very fast, but with a serious hourly rate.

[1]: https://fortune.com/2026/04/28/nvidia-executive-cost-of-ai-i...

[2]: https://www.briefs.co/news/uber-torches-entire-2026-ai-budge...

reply
geir_isene
8 hours ago
[-]
I'm on Claude Max, so it didn't cost me anything more than the subscription I already have. Had to use it for Something. As for time - for the full CHasm and Fe2O3 suite of sw, I started the work 2026-03-29 and have probably spent 60h or so of my time. But then again I have a very tailored CC setup that I have fine-tuned since last summer with more than 70 CC projects helping me get it the way I need it to be since then.
reply
nine_k
8 hours ago
[-]
So, it's at most $400 in Claude expenses for a fully custom suite of software in 2 months. Even if your time is 300/h, it's less than $2k in your own time (which, I would expect, you enjoyed spending). That's insanely impressive.
reply
geir_isene
8 hours ago
[-]
I need Claude Max in any case for my work, so the cost is effectively null. And I do creative stuff in my spare time regardless, and I don't really think about my hourly rate when I play with my kids either ;)
reply
robotresearcher
6 hours ago
[-]
Did you miss a factor of 10 in that time-cost calculation?

As a hobby, normal rates don’t apply, but just not to be misleading on the equivalent cost.

reply
nine_k
5 hours ago
[-]
Indeed, I forgot it. Must be $10-20k worth of human engineering time.
reply
topaz0
3 hours ago
[-]
Do you know how much it would have been at API prices?
reply
blks
2 hours ago
[-]
This is nice, but is also leagues away from something you’re written yourself. Take LLMs out of equation, and you have piles of code that you barely recognise and barely can edit or tweak by yourself.
reply
notesinthefield
1 hour ago
[-]
I dont think it matters at all to OP. Sidestepping the insult, it sounds like they very, very much want to tools that support their needs only, methodology be damned.
reply
senbrow
1 hour ago
[-]
This just doesn't matter for a lot of us. We have LLMs that can tweak it and the tools work as intended.

The whole point of this sentiment is that the personal tools wouldn't EXIST due to the time sink needed.

The tradeoff makes sense for a lot of people even if it's not a good fit for you.

reply
matheusmoreira
27 minutes ago
[-]
Respect. I want to do the same thing. I'm studying electronics, PCBs and CAD in order to build the literal computer that I've always wanted as well. It's my lifetime project. Who knows if I'll ever succeed? I think AI significantly upped my chances but still.
reply
vbernat
8 hours ago
[-]
I find this fascinating. I also like to customize my desktop experience with my own code, but it's more assembling stuff with some additional code as glue.

A word of warning: a reliable lock tool for X11 is difficult. You should look at XSecureLock, which uses a multiprocess approach to avoid leaving the desktop unprotected in case of crash. It also implements a number of countermeasure to ensure the desktop stays locked and the locker stays in the front of the display. It's small too, so easy to audit (but written in C).

reply
geir_isene
8 hours ago
[-]
Thanks. I'll look into it and borrow whatever is useful there into bolt.
reply
cadamsdotcom
2 hours ago
[-]
This is really exciting.

Some of the folks who make things will go on to make things that suit not just their preferences but also those of a small audience.

Some of those audiences will go on to grow and grow and disrupt the big players.

The capital intensive part of software construction is melting away and being converted to opex (payg token costs and your time) and that will blast open the possibility space and lead to a massive new commons.

If the thing was so cheap to create why not open source it!

And if you like someone else’s open source thing but don’t want to take it wholesale why not give it to your agent and say “put the ideas from this onto my thing”!

It’s a new way of thinking about code too.

reply
deepfriedbits
2 hours ago
[-]
Absolutely and you're dead on thinking about the opening of the possibility space. The value of software as an enterprise will fall as we enter an age of abundant, and often custom, bespoke software. There will be many great apps coming and some lousy apps.

Another thing to watch for is how chatty the internet is about to become. A great many of these apps will hit APIs, ping each other, and so forth.

reply
gnabgib
1 hour ago
[-]
Real nice to see two accounts using LLMs discuss nothing like this. They warned us this would happen, and here we are. I guess the topic is apt, but we used to customize windows (95+) and Linux like this (not down to vibe-coded insecure replacement of apps, but display/desktop/widgets/explorer/transparency of components).
reply
deepfriedbits
26 minutes ago
[-]
Wait, are you implying I used an LLM to write my comment? Sorry if I'm misreading what you're saying.
reply
dadoum
8 hours ago
[-]
Sorry I have a question that is a little off-topic: what's the value of generating an image of a laptop on a desk? That's not like it's particularly relevant, when you could have integrated a screen shot of your set-up (like the same one you put on a few of your repos) or something more unique, and even if you want to show that, it's easy to find similar images with the same vibe, so I guess it's for some fun I missed in the process?
reply
geir_isene
6 hours ago
[-]
I like the image. It was simple.
reply
Kalabasa
2 hours ago
[-]
One term for these is "home-cooked" software.

https://maggieappleton.com/home-cooked-software

reply
robotresearcher
9 hours ago
[-]
I’m inspired by the message.

On this software itself: I’d like to know how this feels to use. It’s so very lightweight. Does it feel categorically different to what we are used to?

One of the things I miss about the 1980s home computers is that they booted into a usable command line in a handful of seconds, from a few KB in ROM. Imagine what today’s HW could do if we’d retained that level of efficiency.

reply
salvesefu
9 hours ago
[-]
we are there now. depending on boot loader/os combination, one can get to the sub 1-5 sec range, if its cli-only.
reply
CableNinja
1 hour ago
[-]
Clearly havent seen what enterprise hardware is like these days... sure, the OS takes 5 seconds.. but the hardware can take 10 minutes in some cases now glares at hpe gen11 systems. Its seriously bad now. The amount of power and time backround hardware level tasks now take has significantly increased over the last 10 years. Even the ancient dell r710 i have sititng in a closet collecting dust boots faster than todays hp gen11's.

We waste a ton of energy on ineffeciencies in hardware and software today all because we managed to "just go faster".

reply
geir_isene
9 hours ago
[-]
It feels very different. It's all damn instant. Me happy.
reply
robotresearcher
7 hours ago
[-]
That’s wonderful! I’ve made ultra-lightweight web apps of my own to replace bloated, slow, and poor UIs. It’s a night and day difference when the dependencies are few-to-none. And that’s on a fat browser stack. Your ASM desktop must zip!
reply
chrisweekly
4 hours ago
[-]
Related tangent: https://smolmachines provides microvms with cold-start bootup times around 200ms, and a "pack" utility and format to create self-contained binaries. No affiliation, but I just discovered it a few days ago, sharing bc I find it kind of exciting.
reply
jstanley
9 hours ago
[-]
Why did you choose to have Claude write it in assembly language?

There are big benefits to using a language that has good static analysis with LLMs.

reply
cultofmetatron
9 hours ago
[-]
seriously.... we already have a constellation of good deterministic tooling for taking a relatively high concept spec to low level assembly. what does an llm offer in generating optimized asm that rust wouldn't??
reply
geir_isene
9 hours ago
[-]
Less memory footprint. No reliance on libs. Pure first-person control. No wasted CPU cycles is the target here for me. And if you read the post, the asm set is only for the desktop itself. The tools I use are in Rust. Result is: Laptop now runs at between 5-6W (down from ~9W) [XPS14 latest hw] on Ubuntu 26.04 - giving me around 3.5h extra battery life.
reply
jstanley
7 hours ago
[-]
My guess is you're likely to waste more cycles on development time, and on suboptimal algorithms because the implementation is harder, than you would waste on rust-related bloat.

Still a cool project, thanks for sharing.

I have wondered about having LLMs output machine code directly and skipping the compiler/assembler altogether. Then you'd just commit your spec/prompt and run it through the LLM to get your binary.

reply
cultofmetatron
9 hours ago
[-]
> Less memory footprint. No reliance on libs.

rust can do that. You can run a hyper stripped down rust that was made for embedded devices specifically because those devices don't have room for a runtime.

reply
geir_isene
8 hours ago
[-]
I'm sure I can. The original challenge was more in line of "I wonder if CC can do this now?"

And it apparently can. And very well.

One advantage seems to be that the complete asm file fits easily into CC context window.

reply
cultofmetatron
7 hours ago
[-]
> The original challenge was more in line of "I wonder if CC can do this now?"

well, I can respect that for sure

reply
noashavit
5 hours ago
[-]
I feel like build vs buy is the conversation now. I’m not a developer but I’ve built agents I use daily. When most people can vibe code their way to a custom app, value will most likely hinge on support and other “services”. Just my 2 cents, feel free to tell me I’m wrong!
reply
onetom
6 hours ago
[-]
The agent sessions (traces) would be very educational too.

Would it be possible to share the jsonl files too, like how Mario Zechner shared his chats with the AI, while working on his Pi coding agent?

https://x.com/badlogicgames/status/2041151967695634619?s=46

reply
geir_isene
6 hours ago
[-]
That would be a huge payload with a few thousand prompts...
reply
JHonaker
5 hours ago
[-]
Even better!
reply
mettamage
6 hours ago
[-]
I use code that hooks into existing programs so that I can customize the existing programs to what I want
reply
beanjuiceII
4 hours ago
[-]
everyone is finally coming around to emacs way of doing things after all these years :D
reply
cyberpunk
10 hours ago
[-]
Some screenies and the code at 0…

I struggle to understand why, though.

0: https://github.com/isene/chasm

reply
thom
8 hours ago
[-]
Same reason people muck about with knowledge management systems... to put off the day when you have to sit down at your desk and actually do something.
reply
shampoo_capital
6 hours ago
[-]
Is this an advertisement for Claude Code? It sure seems like it.
reply
uncircle
6 hours ago
[-]
They all are.
reply
yrds96
5 hours ago
[-]
The fact where all posts of this blog make sure to state that claude code is a life changer, i wouldn't doubt about it
reply
badgersnake
6 hours ago
[-]
If it is, it’s not a good one. I just thought “You moron”.
reply
blks
2 hours ago
[-]
Also open source tools can be “hacked” to enable features you want.
reply
cloudhead
5 hours ago
[-]
Did you have to look or review any of the code produced, to get the performance/capabilities that you wanted, or were all interactions through CC? In other words, did you hit any walls with the pure agentic workflow?
reply
geir_isene
5 hours ago
[-]
I monitored the process very tightly. I have programmed my fair share of asm (and some 30 other programming languages), but for this I did not read any code. I hit lots of obstacles on this road, lots. In the process we also created a complete TTF rasterizer on par with what kitty gives me, and that was a true deep-dive.
reply
cloudhead
3 hours ago
[-]
Thanks for explaining!
reply
grebc
7 hours ago
[-]
So how productive are you now vs. before? I assume this was the reason for doing this?
reply
sorenjan
7 hours ago
[-]
I think it's more like gardening.
reply
zem
7 hours ago
[-]
I would think the reason was to enjoy using their system as much as possible.
reply
thatxliner
4 hours ago
[-]
Note that Rust is not in fact named after Fe2O3; it’s named after a resilient fungus of the same name
reply
geir_isene
4 hours ago
[-]
Just goes to show how little I know about Rust.
reply
analogpixel
6 hours ago
[-]
I think this is going to be the OS of the future. You tell the computer what you want to do, and it uses the OS's APIs to create your program for you. No more copilot embedded in notepad unless that what you ask for.

Most software is done after the first or second version and the developers just keep working on it to justify their job; adding features no one needs and just get in the way or make the program worse. It'll be nice when the software I have does exactly what I need and doesn't change until I tell it to change for something I need.

The only feature Macos has shipped in the past 10 years that I actually like is air-drop. Everything else is a PITA annoyance, or as I've found out from upgrading, just bug ridden slop that doesn't work well anymore.

reply
btbuildem
1 hour ago
[-]
> Nor do I have to write documentation for users who don’t exist

Brother mine, you will learn that the future you is ignorant of all the things, and every bit of documentation goes a long way

reply
arjie
5 hours ago
[-]
Haha, it's funny that we've all reached the same conclusion. I, too, believe in the same idea[0][1]. What is fascinating to me is how many things can now be elided from software. I don't use configuration files or things like that. I can simply hardcode everything in because there is only one user. If I want to configure it the other way, I just modify it and rebuild it.

The other thing is that other people's applications are rarely useful. Their libraries are, the feature description READMEs are, but the software itself is full of attempts at generality that make them overly annoying for me to use. Instead I have extremely idiosyncratic software - anyone else would find it insufferable.

The wild thing, though, is that my software is outrageously useful for me. I can see why Anthropic and OpenAI are (or shortly will be) the trillion-dollar behemoths they are. They are enabling a personal productivity increase of epic proportions[2]. The highly specific functionality also means strange things performance wise. I don't need to use Electron or Tauri or whatever. Instead, my thing is Rust with objc2 and it starts instantaneously. On my M1 Max, it's the fastest text viewer I can start. 100s of megabytes of JSON and it's launching is imperceptible for my tool, pretty-printing is instantaneous, breadcrumbs are live.

Because I can make it do only the thing I want it to do. It can't do other things. I cannot edit or auto-complete or anything. And this is great. Useless to others and fantastic to me.

Likewise, my blog is on Mediawiki (which I like so anyone can edit) but the authoring flow is kind of annoying. Uploading images causes a break from writing, and requires a lot of form-filling that interrupts my thought. So I now have this software that does everything I want: link autocompletion, background image uploads, post-hoc publishing, previews and diffs, built-in Wikipedia search to interwiki link. Who would want this but me? It only brings me pleasure.

What a revolution in software.

0: https://wiki.roshangeorge.dev/w/Blog/2026-04-25/The_rise_of_...

1: https://wiki.roshangeorge.dev/w/Blog/2026-04-30/Personal_Sof...

2: Predictably, I have chosen to use the spare time on leisure

reply
geir_isene
5 hours ago
[-]
Cool reply & thanks for the links.
reply
mempko
8 hours ago
[-]
I've been building an object oriented system re-imagined in a world with LLMs called Abject (https://abject.world) and one thought I had was to build an OS that boots into my project. One way to do it would be a minimal linux distro (think firefox os or similar). Has anyone done something like this with their projects?
reply
gbgarbeb
10 hours ago
[-]
Did OP write this by hand? It reads like language written by a human overfitted on GPT 4o or Claude.
reply
geir_isene
9 hours ago
[-]
OP did this: Prompted CC for all the points I wanted included (something like a 200 word prompt) and asked CC to draft it, including all the links added to the table I furnished. Then I edited the draft (about 50% then edited). Then asked CC to spellcheck and fixed the 5 it found.
reply
gbgarbeb
7 hours ago
[-]
Thank you. It would have been nice to see you personalize the hook and show your storytelling voice the way you personalized your computer in the story, but we aren't all poets.
reply
jgilias
9 hours ago
[-]
If they basically generated a desktop for themselves, what’s the chance they didn’t generate the article? I think pretty slim.

Also, reading it is probably not the intended use. It’s probably: “Hey Claude, give me a TLDR of this”

reply
swaits
8 hours ago
[-]
Who cares? It’s their content. If they hired an editor to help them, cool. If the content doesn’t suit you, move on.

But the incessant “AI was used here, thus is it garbage” is long past time to enter the grave.

reply
nananana9
5 hours ago
[-]
Many people care, with good reason. We learned to notice LLM-isms is because they are, in fact, a very strong predictor that a piece of text is in fact garbage that's not worth your time reading.

I usually stop reading at the first LLM-ism, but I found the premise of this post interesting enough to keep going - and guess what, the entire article was literally just "I prompt CC to make software tailored for me" blown out to 8 sections.

reply
wiseowise
4 hours ago
[-]
> Who cares?

The parent comment does. Why do you care that they care?

reply
geir_isene
8 hours ago
[-]
^^ some anti-luddism right there
reply
wiseowise
4 hours ago
[-]
Luddism is when you don't bother reading what someone didn't bother to write.
reply
geir_isene
4 hours ago
[-]
Dictionaries on the second row down that aisle.
reply
gbgarbeb
3 hours ago
[-]
Not a good look to be here fighting in the comments when you could have been writing something that reads like anything other than Claudeslop.
reply
jgilias
7 hours ago
[-]
I agree, yeah
reply