I find this to be a mean and misguided post. To suggest that Victor Taelin does not know about formal methods. As I understand, he is trying to do something genuinely new and interesting. And he is transparent about his work, which he then gets hounded for. A shame.
I found the post offputting because he is insinuating a few things about the author which are clearly untrue (eg, unfamiliar with the formal verification landscape) and he's using this untrue speculation as evidence of the dangers of vibe coding. Even the edit where he says swap it out with a hypothetical person who fits the description - it's still leaving in the untrue claims about the author.
It doesn't seem unreasonable to think it mean if I were to make up speculative negative assumptions about you which undermined something you've been working hard on for a long period of time.
I know nothing about the author, I'm just watching this whole spectacle unfold.
<a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ZLnQcAsAAAAJ&hl=en" rel="nofollow">https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=ZLnQcAsAAAAJ&hl=en This is not the google scholar of a well-known expert, I'm sorry.
While that might not be the largest academic footprint, I don't think you could dispute him being an expert or being 'somewhat well known'.
There are countless people with essentially no domain knowledge to speak of after working on the domain for a decade.
I have no idea how the original authors competency is, I know nothing about them.
There is however a strong correlation between people being influencers and kinda mediocre at what they're an influencer in - which is frankly understandable, because a large part of their skillset is usually more towards attracting an audience and making the topic interesting.
Usually the true domain experts rarely interface with the public beyond their professional capacity.
<a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=search_authors&hl=en&mauthors=Linus+Torvalds&btnG=" rel="nofollow">https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=search_authors&... Is this?
Or perhaps a Google Scholar means jack shit? Since when is that the official measure of an expert.
What has Victor Taelin made which is any way comparable to Linus Torvalds? I'm not saying it's impossible to be a well-known expert with a shitty google scholar. I'm just not seeing any evidence at all in Taelin's case. He doesn't even have a wikipedia page!
It is mean for the last point I mentioned: Taelin is very transpparent about his work which makes it easy to attack him. And what for? This post is not even a proper criticism of Bend 2, it is just trying to paint some story that Taelim is a vinecoder who does not know what he is doing, based on no evidence. If he was not transparent it would not even be known that LLMs have been used.
Because this shitty blogs' author just called someone "vibe-coding a language with no knowledge about the field" who is literally working in that very field for a decade, long predating LLMs, with numerous high-profile works.
You are on the wrong side of this whole discussion, there is only one people here who needs calling out and it's not Bend's author.
golol · · focus · HN ↗
dimgl · · focus · HN ↗
suby · · focus · HN ↗
It doesn't seem unreasonable to think it mean if I were to make up speculative negative assumptions about you which undermined something you've been working hard on for a long period of time.
I know nothing about the author, I'm just watching this whole spectacle unfold.
user43928 · · focus · HN ↗
Considering that he is a somewhat well known expert in the field who has been doing full time research on it for a decade.
suddenlybananas · · focus · HN ↗
user43928 · · focus · HN ↗
suddenlybananas · · focus · HN ↗
It is interesting however, how you weren't familiar with him at all [1] 20 minutes before describing him as a well-known expert.
[1] <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49753179#49754358">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49753179#49754358
golol · · focus · HN ↗
user43928 · · focus · HN ↗
I looked it up, and he seems to have worked on research in that area for a decade.
The author of the blog post could have checked the same before making the claims.
ffsm8 · · focus · HN ↗
I have no idea how the original authors competency is, I know nothing about them.
There is however a strong correlation between people being influencers and kinda mediocre at what they're an influencer in - which is frankly understandable, because a large part of their skillset is usually more towards attracting an audience and making the topic interesting.
Usually the true domain experts rarely interface with the public beyond their professional capacity.
gf000 · · focus · HN ↗
You are splitting hairs for no reason, while standing on the wrong side of this discussion.
Feel free to criticize the project on its actual content.
nullbio · · focus · HN ↗
Or perhaps a Google Scholar means jack shit? Since when is that the official measure of an expert.
suddenlybananas · · focus · HN ↗
nullbio · · focus · HN ↗
vatsachak · · focus · HN ↗
baq · · focus · HN ↗
N_Lens · · focus · HN ↗
golol · · focus · HN ↗
gf000 · · focus · HN ↗
You are on the wrong side of this whole discussion, there is only one people here who needs calling out and it's not Bend's author.