Wordpress wasn't even first, Movable Type was the big thing before it.

WordPress began as a FOSS replacement of Movable Type after Moving Type 3 made the controversial decision to change its licensing fee for some features. So it was like a Unix/Linux situation.

That was Perl though, wasn't it? mod_perl more specifically, IIRC. That alone relegated to a small pool of users.

"maximum lethality, not tepid legality."

AI folks rediscovering "programming" from first principles in much the same way crypto folks rediscovered "regulation."

Yes, you should learn coding if you want to. You should learn anything you want to learn.

I refuse to give my intellect over to the machine just to blindly consume its homogeneous excretions. I will keep doing what I've always done regardless of how well an AI could do it. I don't need to justify doing so, and neither do you, nor does anyone. It's OK to be a human.

I love that. "It's OK to be a human"... "we don't need to justify"

It's weird that "should we still learn" is even a question begin asked on this forum of ostensibly intellectually curious people.

I guess a lot of folks really did just get into programming for the money and hated every minute of it.

How could I improve my question?

The purpose of Show HN is to "show something you've made that other people can play with. HN users can try it out, give you feedback, and ask questions in the thread" (https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html)

That isn't possible with many AI generated projects because OP didn't write the code, probably doesn't understand the code and can't discuss the code or their process in creating it (because said process doesn't exist.) There is little if anything of substance to discuss or play with to satisfy intellectual curiosity, and in many cases the projects themselves wouldn't pass muster if written by a human, they're just vibe-coded slop.

There have been exceptions which have done well (ex:https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49550375) but in that case AI was used in a specific technical context by someone knowledgeable who definitely wasn't "vibe coding" anything. But again - if a human had done all of that work, it would still have been a worthwhile post.

Show HN can't simply be a place where people post slop and everyone claps at how cool the latest models are. It can't simply be advertising for LLMs.

True, thanks for your explanation. I was thinking the same, because I use AI to speed up and I don't accept code unless I know what the code does. Even in YC, I've seen many founders build prototype with AI but again, there's difference between AI slop and AI assisted.

My personal bar for whether a project is AI slop or not (setting aside my personal misgivings about AI in general) is if you could have done it yourself without AI. If not, then the AI is doing all of the heavy lifting and the end result isn't something you made, it's something you had made. Even if you personally find it useful or entertaining, it likely isn't worth posting here.

I agree. Luckily I learnt coding during covid before AI and I experienced how to debug/build through google, stackoverflow etc. Those who are just starting and using AI for everything, they don't know what's called real brainstorming unless AI fails to debug or give expected results.

I assume given the nature of HN that a lot of people use it as a training ground or an experiment, they just do it because they can. Some people may also believe that using an LLM is a more efficient and productive way of interacting with the site, and that it generates higher quality content than they themselves could. I suspect at least one person has tried training an LLM on their own content and posting through it. Maybe they want to farm karma, although I don't know why they would.

Unethically, you'd do it to get a bunch of accounts that you can use to upvote submissions and down vote/flag comments that don't support the narrative you want.

showdead does exactly what it says on the tin - it shows you dead comments.

I really do wonder sometimes whether these questions you post are trolling or if you truly don't understand how humans work on a fundamental level.

Have you considered that mathematicians aren't writers?

Or that your original framing was having no one, rather than "only a few people," read your work?

Do you think mathematicians would be content with having no one but AIs read their work? I don't think so.

This will be the reality of math soon. Complicated proofs will only be checked completely by AI.

That doesn't actually answer any questions, but I doubt mathematicians are entirely thrilled about the prospect of having their field automated, even if they still get paid.

The Soviets launched the first satellite, put the first animal into space, launched the first lunar probe, got the first photographs of the dark side of the moon, put the first human in space, put the first woman in space, put the first craft with more than one crew member into space, did the first spacewalk, sent the first probe to Venus, got the first pictures of another planet, and launched the first space station.

The moon landing was fine and all, a moment of global historic import (and propaganda value, with the US putting their flag on it like they owned the damned thing) but that's still just one victory in a race that was otherwise entirely dominated by the Soviets, and on balance what the Soviets did was of greater scientific merit than anything the US would achieve for years. Americans didn't even care about space until Russia flew Sputnik over their heads.

We realized we needed a delivery mechanism for nuclear weapons before Russia was able to build an ICBM.

Space? That was excellent marketing.

That was a factor in the initial stages of the space race. But military and civilian launch technologies diverged once things really got going. The military switched to solid rocket launchers to improve safety and reliability but those couldn't be used as the core of human rated rockets.