4 ms·

they lost a lot of aura among folks i know with the 'ai skeptics are nuts' article[1]. haven't read a blog post since. [1] https://fly.io/blog/youre-all-nuts/

they lost a lot of aura among folks i know with the 'ai skeptics are nuts' article[1]. haven't read a blog post since. [1] https://fly.io/blog/youre-all-nuts/ https://fly.io/blog/youre-all-nuts/

satvikpendem 2mo ago
Good discussion on the HN thread about that article. To be honest, based on the latest models and agentic engineering, that blog post is definitely right. It's not 2023, 2024, or 2025 anymore, agents have gotten a lot better.
- simonw 2mo ago
  Yeah, I think that post from June 2025 has aged pretty well. The Coding Agent revolution hadn't really happened at that point (Claude Code was only ~4 months old) so the paraphrased message "this stuff is actually useful for programming, saying it's all just stochastic parrots misses the mark" was still non-obvious to a whole lot of people. Honestly, the biggest problem with that article was the title. People read as far as "are nuts", got offended and refused to engage with the content of the piece. This opening paragraph does a much better job of capturing the core argument: > Some of the smartest people I know share a bone-deep belief that AI is a fad — the next iteration of NFT mania. I’ve been reluctant to push back on them, because, well, they’re smarter than me. But their arguments are unserious, and worth confronting. Extraordinarily talented people are doing work that LLMs already do better, out of spite.
  - dijksterhuis 2mo ago
    > Honestly, the biggest problem with that article was the title. Pretty sure the content of a company's blog post being overtly arrogant, abrasive, dismissive and generally dickish was also a problem. > Meanwhile, software developers spot code fragments seemingly lifted from public repositories on Github and lose their shit. What about the licensing? If you’re a lawyer, I defer. But if you’re a software developer playing this card? Cut me a little slack as I ask you to shove this concern up your ass. > Yeah, we get it. You don’t believe in IPR. Then shut the fuck up about IPR. Reap the whirlwind. > but it’ll never be AGI -- I don’t give a shit.
    - tptacek 2mo ago
      [flagged]
      - dijksterhuis 2mo ago
        do you remember writing this? https://fly.io/blog/carving-the-scheduler-out-of-our-orchestrator/ https://fly.io/blog/carving-the-scheduler-out-of-our-orchest... this was amazing post. i enjoyed reading it, it was relevant to some work stuff i was battling with. the linked articles at the end were amazing too. i had tonnes of respect for fly.io and yourself because of these posts. technically informative, clear, engaging. great stuff. the llm post? complete polar opposite. > I would like to take this moment to apologize to you, personally, for not giving a shit about "AGI". I wish I could tell you I've come to see the error of my ways, but I continue not to care about it. thanks for the snark, and kinda proving my previous point about the tone of the article that was supposed to be a personal blog post and then ended up on a company blog https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49052217 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49052217
        tptacek 2mo ago
        I'm not being snarky. I genuinely do not care about AGI. It's weird to watch people write as if I'm trying to back away from that article or hedge or whatever. I expect to wrap my career up at some point and look at that post as one of the better and more valuable things I've ever written.
        deleted 2mo ago
        [deleted]
        john_strinlai 2mo ago
        >I'm not being snarky "I would like to take this moment to apologize to you, personally, for not giving a shit about "AGI"." appears to be dripping with snark
        2mo ago
  - satvikpendem 2mo ago
    Indeed, it's not worth engaging with AI skeptics anymore today, it's just a waste of time. If they don't see the value then they probably never will, and that's not my problem.
    - tptacek 2mo ago
      This is what I mean about the static equilibrium in 2025. That's what everyone was doing: just writing the other side off. That post of mine did a lot of things, but it did not do that.
      - satvikpendem 2mo ago
        I never said your post did, and anyway I'm talking about today in 2026.
        tptacek 2mo ago
        I wouldn't write the same post in 2026. What would be the point? Everybody already accepts the arguments in it.
        satvikpendem 2mo ago
        I think you are misunderstanding me, when I replied initially to the first comment to Simon, I was talking about my opinion on the general matter unrelated to your post's specifics, as in, I personally wouldn't debate AI anymore, not that I was speaking in relation to what you wrote.
  - tptacek 2mo ago
    The title was the point of the post. I have acquaintances who are still sore at me about it. But the problem wasn't that people disagreed with me about LLMs; the problem was that we were locked in an unproductive and static equilibrium of people talking past each other and hedging their way out of any direct, empirical confrontation over what was happening. It's easy to forget how different early 2025 was to today. You would generally feel like you were in an inverse Emperor's New Clothes situation if you believed what your own eyes told you about how LLMs wrote code. That's not the case anymore; you hardly ever see people talking about (or, really, extrapolating wildly about) hallucination today. (For a lot of reasons I think a lot about how that post was received in 2025 and what the world is like today. "Vindicated" doesn't capture the feeling.)
    - otterley 2mo ago
      > The title was the point of the post. I still find it incredibly troubling. Not because the substance was wrong, but because a person of your caliber has stooped to the level of writing provocative headlines and language to attract attention. I strongly believe world-class technologists are supposed to be above that sort of thing. Leadership matters: not just thought leadership, but attitudinal leadership.
      - ai_critic 2mo ago
        [flagged]
        otterley 2mo ago
        > consider how difficult it would be to find a nice way of writing an article Writing is often difficult. That's what makes good writing so distinctive and valuable. Just because something is hard doesn't mean it's not worth putting in the effort. > "You are all fucking idiots" is sometimes a reasonable starting point. It might be a good starting point in one's head (which, admittedly, it often is for me, but I then try to convert that into something more persuasive and less divisive). I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on that.
- its-summertime 2mo ago
  I think the effect was less about it being correct or not, but instead more about if fly.io would treat humans as first class users compared to agents or not in the future. The message is fine, but it was a weird choice to have it on fly.io instead of a personal blog
  - satvikpendem 2mo ago
    It's just marketing, going with the times of lots of vibe coders now suddenly wanting to put something on the Internet. I wouldn't read too much into it as a fundamental philosophy.
- latency-guy2 2mo ago
  It's right in the point it brings up that modern LLMs are serious engineering and quite a bit capable at many tasks. It's not correct on the rest where Ptacek appears dismissive because 'he doesn't wanna hear' about copyright and other things, maybe we chalk it up to an upset guy at people he believes and maybe knows are wrong and ignore the rest of the spiel, but I won't.
- bigstrat2003 2mo ago
  It's not 2023, 2024, or 2025, but LLMs still suck at programming. Just like every other time AI enthusiasts have claimed the latest and greatest is so much better than what came before.
  - simonw 2mo ago
    > LLMs still suck at programming They really don't. You're clearly the intended audience for https://fly.io/blog/youre-all-nuts/ https://fly.io/blog/youre-all-nuts/ !
    - ViscountPenguin 2mo ago
      All of the contents of the article are basically correct (minus the agi bit), but god the tone is insufferable. I doubt it's done anything but dig sceptics further in tbh.
echelon 2mo ago
[flagged]
wackget 2mo ago
Wow. Opinions on LLMs aside, the CEO writing an article like that makes me think fly.io is a deeply unserious company.
- tptacek 2mo ago
  The CEO didn't write that article. I did. I was going to run it on my personal blog, and he asked me to run it there. Be mad at him for the right reason.
  - ragall 2mo ago
    [flagged]
    - tptacek 2mo ago
      I am, as I'm fond of pointing out, very comfortable with who does and doesn't take me seriously.
  - RickHull 2mo ago
    I've been reading these comments and finally read the "Nuts" blog post. I guess I understand the butthurt, but I really appreciate this style of writing. Curt, forceful, to the point, fronting any internal conflict the reader may hold. This is clearly painful for conflicted readers. For the unconflicted, it is satisfying to merely agree or disagree.
latency-guy2 2mo ago
[flagged]
- sisve 2mo ago
  Maybe tone it down? personal attacks are not needed or wanted. Let's discuss AI, if not keep your comments for yourself
john_strinlai 2mo ago
the way certain people at that company speak to others (e.g. that post) is why they will never count me as a customer. although im sure they dont care.

they lost a lot of aura among folks i know with the 'ai skeptics are nuts' article[1]. haven't read a blog post since. [1] https://fly.io/blog/youre-all-nuts/ https://fly.io/blog/youre-all-nuts/

satvikpendem 2mo ago

Good discussion on the HN thread about that article. To be honest, based on the latest models and agentic engineering, that blog post is definitely right. It's not 2023, 2024, or 2025 anymore, agents have gotten a lot better.

simonw 2mo ago
Yeah, I think that post from June 2025 has aged pretty well. The Coding Agent revolution hadn't really happened at that point (Claude Code was only ~4 months old) so the paraphrased message "this stuff is actually useful for programming, saying it's all just stochastic parrots misses the mark" was still non-obvious to a whole lot of people. Honestly, the biggest problem with that article was the title. People read as far as "are nuts", got offended and refused to engage with the content of the piece. This opening paragraph does a much better job of capturing the core argument: > Some of the smartest people I know share a bone-deep belief that AI is a fad — the next iteration of NFT mania. I’ve been reluctant to push back on them, because, well, they’re smarter than me. But their arguments are unserious, and worth confronting. Extraordinarily talented people are doing work that LLMs already do better, out of spite.
- dijksterhuis 2mo ago
  > Honestly, the biggest problem with that article was the title. Pretty sure the content of a company's blog post being overtly arrogant, abrasive, dismissive and generally dickish was also a problem. > Meanwhile, software developers spot code fragments seemingly lifted from public repositories on Github and lose their shit. What about the licensing? If you’re a lawyer, I defer. But if you’re a software developer playing this card? Cut me a little slack as I ask you to shove this concern up your ass. > Yeah, we get it. You don’t believe in IPR. Then shut the fuck up about IPR. Reap the whirlwind. > but it’ll never be AGI -- I don’t give a shit.
  - tptacek 2mo ago
    [flagged]
    - dijksterhuis 2mo ago
      do you remember writing this? https://fly.io/blog/carving-the-scheduler-out-of-our-orchestrator/ https://fly.io/blog/carving-the-scheduler-out-of-our-orchest... this was amazing post. i enjoyed reading it, it was relevant to some work stuff i was battling with. the linked articles at the end were amazing too. i had tonnes of respect for fly.io and yourself because of these posts. technically informative, clear, engaging. great stuff. the llm post? complete polar opposite. > I would like to take this moment to apologize to you, personally, for not giving a shit about "AGI". I wish I could tell you I've come to see the error of my ways, but I continue not to care about it. thanks for the snark, and kinda proving my previous point about the tone of the article that was supposed to be a personal blog post and then ended up on a company blog https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49052217 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49052217
      - tptacek 2mo ago
        I'm not being snarky. I genuinely do not care about AGI. It's weird to watch people write as if I'm trying to back away from that article or hedge or whatever. I expect to wrap my career up at some point and look at that post as one of the better and more valuable things I've ever written.
        deleted 2mo ago
        [deleted]
        john_strinlai 2mo ago
        >I'm not being snarky "I would like to take this moment to apologize to you, personally, for not giving a shit about "AGI"." appears to be dripping with snark
        2mo ago
- satvikpendem 2mo ago
  Indeed, it's not worth engaging with AI skeptics anymore today, it's just a waste of time. If they don't see the value then they probably never will, and that's not my problem.
  - tptacek 2mo ago
    This is what I mean about the static equilibrium in 2025. That's what everyone was doing: just writing the other side off. That post of mine did a lot of things, but it did not do that.
    - satvikpendem 2mo ago
      I never said your post did, and anyway I'm talking about today in 2026.
      - tptacek 2mo ago
        I wouldn't write the same post in 2026. What would be the point? Everybody already accepts the arguments in it.
        satvikpendem 2mo ago
        I think you are misunderstanding me, when I replied initially to the first comment to Simon, I was talking about my opinion on the general matter unrelated to your post's specifics, as in, I personally wouldn't debate AI anymore, not that I was speaking in relation to what you wrote.
- tptacek 2mo ago
  The title was the point of the post. I have acquaintances who are still sore at me about it. But the problem wasn't that people disagreed with me about LLMs; the problem was that we were locked in an unproductive and static equilibrium of people talking past each other and hedging their way out of any direct, empirical confrontation over what was happening. It's easy to forget how different early 2025 was to today. You would generally feel like you were in an inverse Emperor's New Clothes situation if you believed what your own eyes told you about how LLMs wrote code. That's not the case anymore; you hardly ever see people talking about (or, really, extrapolating wildly about) hallucination today. (For a lot of reasons I think a lot about how that post was received in 2025 and what the world is like today. "Vindicated" doesn't capture the feeling.)
  - otterley 2mo ago
    > The title was the point of the post. I still find it incredibly troubling. Not because the substance was wrong, but because a person of your caliber has stooped to the level of writing provocative headlines and language to attract attention. I strongly believe world-class technologists are supposed to be above that sort of thing. Leadership matters: not just thought leadership, but attitudinal leadership.
    - ai_critic 2mo ago
      [flagged]
      - otterley 2mo ago
        > consider how difficult it would be to find a nice way of writing an article Writing is often difficult. That's what makes good writing so distinctive and valuable. Just because something is hard doesn't mean it's not worth putting in the effort. > "You are all fucking idiots" is sometimes a reasonable starting point. It might be a good starting point in one's head (which, admittedly, it often is for me, but I then try to convert that into something more persuasive and less divisive). I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on that.
its-summertime 2mo ago
I think the effect was less about it being correct or not, but instead more about if fly.io would treat humans as first class users compared to agents or not in the future. The message is fine, but it was a weird choice to have it on fly.io instead of a personal blog
- satvikpendem 2mo ago
  It's just marketing, going with the times of lots of vibe coders now suddenly wanting to put something on the Internet. I wouldn't read too much into it as a fundamental philosophy.
latency-guy2 2mo ago
It's right in the point it brings up that modern LLMs are serious engineering and quite a bit capable at many tasks. It's not correct on the rest where Ptacek appears dismissive because 'he doesn't wanna hear' about copyright and other things, maybe we chalk it up to an upset guy at people he believes and maybe knows are wrong and ignore the rest of the spiel, but I won't.
bigstrat2003 2mo ago
It's not 2023, 2024, or 2025, but LLMs still suck at programming. Just like every other time AI enthusiasts have claimed the latest and greatest is so much better than what came before.
- simonw 2mo ago
  > LLMs still suck at programming They really don't. You're clearly the intended audience for https://fly.io/blog/youre-all-nuts/ https://fly.io/blog/youre-all-nuts/ !
  - ViscountPenguin 2mo ago
    All of the contents of the article are basically correct (minus the agi bit), but god the tone is insufferable. I doubt it's done anything but dig sceptics further in tbh.

echelon 2mo ago

[flagged]

wackget 2mo ago

Wow. Opinions on LLMs aside, the CEO writing an article like that makes me think fly.io is a deeply unserious company.

tptacek 2mo ago
The CEO didn't write that article. I did. I was going to run it on my personal blog, and he asked me to run it there. Be mad at him for the right reason.
- ragall 2mo ago
  [flagged]
  - tptacek 2mo ago
    I am, as I'm fond of pointing out, very comfortable with who does and doesn't take me seriously.
- RickHull 2mo ago
  I've been reading these comments and finally read the "Nuts" blog post. I guess I understand the butthurt, but I really appreciate this style of writing. Curt, forceful, to the point, fronting any internal conflict the reader may hold. This is clearly painful for conflicted readers. For the unconflicted, it is satisfying to merely agree or disagree.

latency-guy2 2mo ago

[flagged]

sisve 2mo ago
Maybe tone it down? personal attacks are not needed or wanted. Let's discuss AI, if not keep your comments for yourself

john_strinlai 2mo ago

the way certain people at that company speak to others (e.g. that post) is why they will never count me as a customer. although im sure they dont care.