zlacker

Saying "this tool is genuinely useful to me and it's baffling how many people refuse to acknowledge that could possible be true" is not a sign that someone is being paid to "shill for AI".

(If it is then damn, I've been leaving a ton of money on the table.)

>>simonw+(OP)
Some days it seems like the most vulgar Marxist would be more rigorous about doing a who-benefits analysis before using that to dismiss an argument than the median HN commenter. Fly.io benefits from AI hype because... more slop code gets written and then run on their servers? tptacek would burn his HN cred for that? Really?

>>kalkin+N
> Fly.io benefits from AI hype because... more slop code gets written and then run on their servers?

I don't know if that's what fly.io is going for here, but their competitors are explicitly leaning into that angle so it's not that implausible. Vercel is even vertically integrating the slop-to-prod pipeline with v0.

>>jshear+W1
As far as I can see this only makes sense if they actually believe that AI will accelerate production code that people will want to pay to keep running. Maybe they're wrong about that, but it's got to be sincere, or the strategy would be incoherent.

>>kalkin+U2
There are a lot of people whom's brain warning signals shut off when they think they are onto some money making idea. They will spend vastly illogicall amounts to "keep it going" often for years before admiting it's not working.

Look at stock market courses for instance. They are endlessly prevalent, an eternally green scam. People spend thousands to lose even more money all the time. Sunk cost fallacy is very hard for a lot of people to overcome. Scammers count on it. There is literally millions to be made in these scams if you have zero moral fiber and zero shame.

We are in a golden age of such scams. Not my quote but one article I read said something like business students right now are putting Adam Neumann's picture on their dorm walls to aspire to be like him...