bakugo

> Does the project have an inclusive code of conduct?

If you want a project to be community driven, adding an agreement that empowers its leaders to punish and exclude any community member for any reason, including reasons that have nothing to do with the project itself, is the opposite of that.

Codes of conduct result in dictator-driven projects, not community-driven projects.

> Slowly, more and more user accounts get banned, and even technical people I know fail to make a new account which lasts more than 3-4 days.

Meanwhile bots are running rampant and I can't scroll through the site for 10 minutes without seeing an obvious bot post or comment. Dead internet is real.

> The median new plugin used to end up with a couple thousand installs. It's now 28.

This feels like a microcosm of software development as a whole.

There's more software than ever, yet there are fewer people engaging with said software than ever, and the good software gets buried under a giant pile of crap.

Might be easier to list the things AI isn't ruining.

> it's a huge savings over getting a human to do it

This of course assumes it's something anyone would consider worth paying a human to do (it's not).

Does DeepSeek offer a heavily subsidized subscription that provides 20x+ more usage than the equivalent value in API tokens?

API usage being profitable is completely plausible, but almost nobody pays API prices for Claude and GPT, nor would they be able to afford them if the subscription suddenly stopped existing.

> I, and many of my friends and cooks could take this easily.

No, you couldn't.

> The difference is that PHP has a long history of vulnerabilities while platforms like Java don't.

What makes you say that? I know several websites that ran on unpatched PHP 5 versions for over a decade, without a care in the world until now, because there were no known serious vulnerabilities in the interpreter itself.

Strange to see this so far down the front page. If the rumors are true, it may be worse than Log4Shell.

So excited that you avoid writing a single line of it at all costs.

Trying to slow down the growth would be an admission that everyone having their AI agents pushing 500 commits per hour autonomously may not be an objectively good thing for everyone involved. They won't do that.

Linus thinks AI is no different from a compiler, so it's likely that none of these commits are being reviewed. After all, how often do you doubt your compiler's output?

Honestly, who isn't bragging about their vibecoding tokenmaxxing attitude nowadays?

They do this on Reddit as well. Some accounts post about news and events with an image attached, and just so happen to include a reference to Polymarket somewhere in the image every time, even when it makes no sense.

I highly recommend just using your normal browser to navigate the store. Using it within the client doesn't really provide any advantages at all.

I said it back when they first migrated to Electron, and I'll say it again now. It's not the slowest thing ever by modern standards, but it's definitely not fast, either, and is pretty bloated in terms of memory usage.

It only looks good if you compare it to the Epic client, which somehow manages to be much worse.

> the take is don't ban tools

Yes, and that take is bad, because AI is not a tool in the traditional sense. In the software world, tools are generally expected to be deterministic. Would Linus use a compiler that is known to have a random chance to output the wrong instructions? Or an editor that has a random chance to swap something you typed for something else?

> compiler outputs are tested by the compiler projects + the automated testing infra

And AI outputs are tested by the AI companies and the various testing suites that are run on the kernel. If they're really the same like Linus seems to believe, there's no reason to ever read AI generated patches before merging them.

Linus's take is just the same nonsensical false equivalence I've seen a million times. He sure has fallen a long way since his glory days.

Someone should ask him if he's also planning on no longer reviewing patches to the kernel and just accepting them unconditionally, since AI is no different from a compiler after all, and nobody reviews compiler outputs.

Pretty sure the police won't come after you for criticizing disabled people or your colleagues' babies.

Their support has become increasingly worse in recent years, too. They now try to steer you out of trying to talk to a human for customer support as much as possible.

If you manage to navigate your way through a bunch of FAQ pages to find the chat button, you'll be met with a basic AI chatbot that just tries to repeat those same FAQ entries back to you. If you manage to also navigate that and convince it that you need to talk to a human (you'll need to confirm it like 3 times), you might get lucky and finally be able to chat with a person who can barely speak English and will actively lie to you in an attempt to end the chat faster.

Here's a recent experience of mine: I managed to get a deal on a 4TB Samsung SSD, something like $330 before shipping on Amazon.com. I'm in Europe, so shipping would be pretty expensive, but even so it was still an amazing deal considering how expensive SSDs are now. So I ordered it, and two months later it was still not shipped with absolutely no word whatsoever from Amazon. So I got in contact with their support, they could never once tell me what was actually happening, they'd just repeat something like "I have filed a ticket with the fulfillment center and you will receive a shipping update within 48 hours" every time. It was always a lie - I would wait, not hear anything back, and contact them again. Did this 5 times, every time I'd get a similar response, once I was thrown around between 4 different support agents and none of them said anything of value. Eventually gave up and just canceled the order.

> Now, we only have ourselves to blame: we built this technology, we enthusiastically embraced it and one-upped each other by showing how much we can vibecode.

Speak for yourself. I have never done any of this and I don't want to be associated with the people who do.

I believe it's all related. They keep adding new, badly thought out features because it's much easier than improving existing features built on low quality code.

The latter requires modifying existing, badly architectured and tightly coupled code that will almost definitely break something somewhere else if touched, so what do you do? Just keep adding new code on top and hope for the best.

This is not a new phenomenon by any means, but AI amplifies it by 100x.

Because they're the most likely to be 100% vibe coded. And as much as some people still deny it, AI code = buggy code.

We're not in the 2010s anymore, consumer hardware is actively regressing. Smartphones are actually a great example to bring up, because I believe 2026 was the first year in which smartphone hardware did not advance at all (and arguably declined) relative to price, due to AI-related shortages.

Nobody can predict the future, of course, but I personally believe this pattern will hold. A decade from now, the idea of a consumer being able to purchase a personal device with more than 8GB of RAM will be a thing of the past, all significant compute will be done in the cloud using the massive amounts of hardware being hoarded by corporations as we speak.

Why would you dedicate months or even years to doing something just for the sake of it, when you know your creation will be buried underneath 20 other low quality versions of it made in a week by people who are doing it purely for attention and don't even care?

Do you believe the average person can afford the 1TB+ VRAM required to run a competent model?

Pretty sure Stallman would have some choice words to say about his idea of "software freedom" being twisted to include "relying on a corporation's subscription service for all your software needs and being unable to do anything yourself".

The amount of responses to this obvious bot comment is somewhat sad.

Can we please have just one post on the front page of HN without AI astroturfing comments at the top?

> X is such a game changer

I hear this literally every other week about whatever the newest FoTM model is.

Unless you can provide concrete examples of things you can do with them that you simply couldn't do with last week's model, it's absolutely meaningless.