9d

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for people sharing what they created with joy. And I'll even rejoice with you if it's genuinely cool. But to say "only we can do this" is like saying "we're the best, all of you are beneath us, and you always will be" and is just really off putting. I get that it's a marketing tone, but you could have just omitted those words "only apple can achieve" and just showed off the really cool thing you had and got us excited about that, rather than putting focus on the company itself. It's like how in movies they say show don't tell. Just show us the product, don't tell us how great you are.

> "... and a fluidity that only Apple can achieve ..." (from the promo video on https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2025/06/apple-introduces-a-de... )

I'm excited to see this effect turned into a WebGL library in literally a week by some smart devs out there, and then adapted by Material Design in another month. Really? Only apple? This kind of rhetoric might have worked on me 20 years ago, but today it's just sad how obviously false it is.

I emphasize that it's the Vatican because they are the most theologically careful of all. This isn't some church with a superstitious pastor who jumps to conclusions about the rapture at a dime drop. This is the Church which is hesitant to say literally anything about the book of Revelation at all, which is run by tired men who just want to keep the status quo so they can hopefully hit retirement without any trouble.

I forgot to say the second part:

Using AI is the same as code-review or being a PM:

1. Have an ideal abstraction

2. Reverse engineer an actual abstraction from code

3. Compare the two and see if they match up

4. If they don't, ask the author to change or fix it until it does

5. Repeat steps 2-4 until it does

This is incredibly not fun, because it's not a creative process.

You're essentially just an accountant or calculator at this point.

Full link and relevant quote:

https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/docu...

> Moreover, AI may prove even more seductive than traditional idols for, unlike idols that “have mouths but do not speak; eyes, but do not see; ears, but do not hear” (Ps. 115:5-6), AI can “speak,” or at least gives the illusion of doing so (cf. Rev. 13:15).

It quotes Rev. 13:15 which says (RSVCE):

> and it was allowed to give breath to the image of the beast so that the image of the beast should even speak, and to cause those who would not worship the image of the beast to be slain.

> It doesn't give me any of the same kind of intellectual satisfaction that I get out of actually writing code.

Writing code is a really fun creative process:

1. Conceive an exciting and useful idea

2. Comprehend the idea fully from its top to its bottom

3. Translate the idea into specific instructions utilizing known mechanics

4. Find the beautiful middleground between instruction and abstraction

5. Write lots and lots of code!

6. Find where your conception was flawed and fix it as necessary.

7. Repeat steps 2-6 until the thing works just as you dreamed or you give up.

It's maybe the most fun and exciting mixture of art and technology ever.

Considering the actual Vatican literally linked AI to the apocalypse, and did so in the most official capacity[1], I don't think avoiding AI has to be ludditism.

[1] Antiqua et Nova p. 105, cf. Rev. 13:15

Wait, is this a competition?

Am I wrong about this?

Their algorithms were simpler.

Their output was simpler.

As their complexity grew, proportionately did program performance.

Not to mention adding language convenience features (generics, closures).

C++ will be a very useful, fast, safe, and productive language in 2070.

Every few years I look into D and read it and think it's really good and want to write something in it. But then I come across comments on HN that make me feel like it's not good enough compared to something like C++ or Rust. I know I should ignore those, and I do like having a GC, so D seems like maybe a better Go. But one thing I always put ahead of everything else is developer convenience, for example, autocompletion and hover-docs in VS Code. I assume D has these, but I also assume that it's not as well supported as it is in Rust, mostly thanks to some sort of principle that probably has a name by now, where the more hype a language has, the more support its entire ecosystem has, regardless of whether it's a good language or not. Kind of like how writing TypeScript for the web is now amazing to work with, being a zeroeth-class citizen in VS Code (soon to be lowered to first-class after the Go rewrite), simply because JavaScript is the only native language the web speaks. Anyway, if D has wrapper libs for SDL3 and V8, decent docs, works well on both Win&Mac, and has good enough VS Code support, I'd be glad to give it a shot.

Well I tried.

Oh so then you're already doing that. Well then that's fine, the tasks will get done when they get done then.

That's about size and popularity, not maturity.

Several very popular, small, mature projects have zero or few open issues.

(And several mature, huge and unpopular ones too.)

Have you considered hiring people to help you with these tasks so you can work in parallel and get more done quicker?

All languages are safe if you use them correctly, and unsafe if you don't.

But Rust is notorious for catching memory errors that could easily be exploited. Does Zig do this too now, or did I miss something?

> And we’re looking at aarch64 next - work that is expected to be accelerated thanks to our new Legalize pass.

Sorry, what?

> For a larger project like the Zig compiler itself, it takes the time down from 75 seconds to 20 seconds. We’re only just getting started.

Excited to see what he can do with this. He seems like a really smart guy.

What's the package management look like? I tried to get an app with QuickJS + SDL3 working, but the mess of C++ pushed me to Rust where it all just works. Would be glad to try it out in Zig too.

Pure iOS apps stopped being profitable in 2009 or so.

Ideally I'd like something like AssemblyScript on wasmtime, but then I'd have to compile `asc` (assemblyscript's tsc) to wasm first or something, since AssemblyScript is written in TypeScript, and Rust has no native TypeScript runtime. And it all started because rquickjs is really confusing and not very documented, though it's so heavily used that random usages on github have been serving well enough for now.

I do.

Cool high five

2005: I don't have a TV

2015: I don't have a smartphone

2020: I don't have social media

2025: I don't have friends

> I wish I could surf just that internet and so on.

You just solved it for me.

I've been wondering what to use 90s.dev for.

That's it.

100% agree, you must be bored to be inspired.

I think I know how to recapture that "whole new world" feeling and share it.

It's on the tip of my tongue, and has been for a while.

But I can't fully see it yet. I need to go offline for a while. You're right.

I agree, and I'm convinced selling my own software is the only way I can do that. At least for me. I just need to put it all together now, all the skillsets I've honed for decades, and the insight I might have gleaned from what people need.

To be fair, if you're going to just be a genuinely superior person than other people are, you might as well just brag about that superiority since there's nothing else it's useful for.

Wow. These actually have style while being monospaced!

And I can actually see myself using them! That's very rare.

I'm going to try each of these out over the next 5 days.

Starting with Radon. An italic-first pretty monospace font? Yes please!

(I eventually had to add uppercase, which ended up being 3x5 but whatever)