Y’all cowards always implying. Say the thing you think. Just say it. I’ll start: I think getting upset by a pronouns dropdown is literal homophobia, in that y’all are so scared, worried, and bothered by thinking about gay shit that you’re installing software about it.
> I like Stripe's long-stated mission ("To increase the GDP of the Internet").
Also corporate speak. Their mission is take their cut of the Internet's GDP. Nothing against them, they provide real value for that cut. But that's what the actual mission is.
That feels unfair to read it that way. The mission as stated is that they will not only take a cut of the pie but grow the pie. If the total value they add is greater than the value they capture, everyone wins.
You might not believe them, but that’s what the words are supposed to mean.
> You might not believe them, but that’s what the words are supposed to mean.
It's corporate bullshit not because I don't believe they can grow the pie, but because that's not their motivation.
In fact, a nice formula for coming up with your corporate mission statement would be:
1. Ignore your company's ground-truth financial incentives
2. Find a positive 2nd order effect E (or a plausible one) that you don't really care about, but maybe you genuinely think is nice
3. Claim your "passion for E" is what drove you to start your company, and keeps you working, because, of course, all great companies must have a "deeper purpose"
It's not mutually exclusive. I remember the Bad Old Days of trying to make the PayPal button work; if Stripe makes it easier for people to take payment online then it increases the GDP of the Internet.
> Stripe last said businesses on its platform generated $1.9 trillion in payment volume in 2025, up 34% year over year.
More transaction volume = more enterprise value potential. More GDP, total rake goes up of said economic activity they facilitate. Middleman Moat, accumulating volume (present via Paypal, future via OpenRouter).
It's particularly stupid given that if you look at where the tokens are being spent, the top application overwhelmingly is Hermes Agent. It's more than the next six clients combined.
Hermes Agent is AI slop "ai assistant" software that is being entirely developed by a bunch of AI agents. They are stuck in a constant whack-a-mole bug fix session because the agents keep breaking things.
Openrouter is being entirely propped up by garbage-tier software that is only popular because it's being endlessly hyped by idiot youtuber AI Agent Bros who are so uncreative and incapable of critical thought, they're using AI agents to tell them what content to make.
When people finally realize how bad Hermes is, OpenRouter is pretty fucked. And then when all the weebs writing furry porn get bored and move on, they'll be fucked even more.
What's really bad about this: Stripe is so tightly tied to the credit card industry that said industry's obsession with morality policing will force Stripe to start censoring openrouter.
It’s opinions are actively steered by a man who promotes the great replacement theory, white genocide, and remigration which is the mass forced deportation of non-whites.
It’s wild to, in a thread about an unusual number of suicides among a branch of government doing secret stuff, say that folks talking about that secret stuff would be a good idea.
I am absolutely not saying that is what’s happening here, suicide of folks put in stressful situations is to be taken seriously. But like… c’mon guy, surely this exact premise has been a direct-to-Amazon-Video release.
I don't know what the author's native language is, but I assume it's something I'd need machine translation for anyway. Having it in good (if not Nobel prize level great) English is much easier - and will probably be easier to find again via search.
Because it's a strong signal of AI slop. Why put in more work than the "author" did?
If the author generated text that required no effort, and has no understanding of the contents of the material generated, and no self-awareness of their behavior and how the audience will receive it, it definitely doesn't warrant wasting a single second reading it.
Now, granted, maybe they did review it, maybe they did understand it, maybe they did know how it would be received and merely made a mistake, but how are we to know? It quacks like a duck.
That's like inhaling a virus to see if it's contagious. Reading text generated by a model tuned with RLHF is a dangerous pastime. It's all too easy to reach past a human's critical thinking and push the pleasure buttons. Uncanny valley is uncanny for a reason. As social monkeys we instinctively screech danger warnings at each other; AI slop gets the same treatment as an alligator pretending to be a log.
Saying that something is thought terminating is thought terminating, it's the laziest "I win" bullshit approach ever. A more nuanced approach: don't produce slop and people won't dismiss it as lazy bullshit either.
No, that's not true at all. Thought-terminating cliches cause you to stop thinking; they give a quick shortcut that let's you be dismissive. That's what "AI slop" is, when someone bestows the moniker on a piece of prose that has "It's not this, it's that" in it.
Look, there's is a wide variety of work being produced with AI, all the way from exceptional professional work to total trash done by amateurs. Painting all over those efforts with the same brush of "AI slop" attempts to avoid the thought necessary to process the nuance in each individual situation. In fact, folks that use "AI slop" enjoy being able to dismiss AI output as quickly as possible; they seem to be quite happy to forgo whatever insights might be present in such work. But let's not for a moment pretend it's not a crappy heuristic.
Through this lens, dunking on a piece of prose because it has some trace of LLM processing seems both useless and uninsightful, which is why I'm rallying against it as thought-terminating. Do the thinking to determine whether what you're reading is valid. Saying that it has tells that an LLM might have contributed is not sufficient evidence to do that, and it's also something anyone can do, it requires no skill or insight, and makes for boring discussion. Zero curiousity, 100% dismissive.
Yes, it’s dismissive, intentionally and abrasively so. Because the author is being disrespectful to the reader, expecting them to put more effort into it than they did. I will happily be uncurious about a text the author couldn't even bother to proofread and clean up. Life is finite, LLMs could generate more text than I could ever possibly read, there has to be a quality filter we all apply and I’ve drawn my line in the sand.
You’re arguing in favor of what I view as pollution. I’m not lacking thought, it didn’t terminate, you just value slop for reasons I don’t.
That statement means nothing. You could say the exact same thing about Rails and have an equally defensible position. What about its architecture makes it better?
Hanami is quite nice. I haven’t had the opportunity to use it in anger but I have had a crush on it for a while now.
I really do hope ROM-rb, the not-orm Hanami uses, gets some development love as a consequence of this more formal merger. It’s a rad tool with enough rough edges that I had to switch away from it when launching a product a few years ago.
Definitely on the roadmap! I've also run into some rough edges with Rom and we want to fix those all up in a new version. We were just prioritizing Hanami 3 for the medium term, but hopefully we can focus efforts on Rom soon.
It’s weak. Y’all are weak.
reply