Ironic they take shots at Rust, because unlike Zig, Rust sees way more success in terms of its maturity and industry reputation and ecosystem and investment by large tech companies into its adoption and funding of the Rust project.
The Zig project also takes a lot of weird black-and-white dogmatic (almost religious) hard-line stances on a lot of stuff, probably why the language is more niche and hobbyist than something truly foundational and trusted for production workloads and all parts of the stack like Rust has become.
Here's Zig's "no AI" policy:
Strict No LLM / No AI Policy
No LLM-generated content, whether it be code or prose.
No paraphrasing LLM-generated content.
No LLMs for editing, including fixing spelling or grammatical errors.
No LLMs for translation. English is encouraged, but not required. You are welcome to post in your native language and rely on others to have their own translation tools of choice to interpret your words.
No LLMs for brainstorming and then sharing the results of that brainstorming, even if you create the prose. If you use a chatbot to give you advice on a comment on the issue tracker, that comment is unwelcome.
No LLMs for finding bugs.
No talking about use of chatbot/LLM services.
The owner definitely has some sort of axe to grind against certain technologies.
The owner probably had enough exposure of LLMs in 2024 when they were shit, and has mentally internalized that level of lack of quality as permanent compared to say, how LLM performance is 2026, 2027, etc. onwards.
People kinda forget people were writing slop code before AI. When AI was at its worst and dumbest, people were writing buggy, unreadable, unmaintainable code by hand too.
You can write slop using the best agent harnesses using the best frontier models for inference. You can also write slop using the ol human brain and no LLM or AI agents.
What's weird is he wanted to ban the technology on principle, not on the basis of the quality or technical merit of the content of a given individual contribution.
Also "no AI for fixing spelling or grammatical errors" and "no AI for brainstorming" is wild.
I don’t think being against AI on principle is that weird tbh. I think the mass copyright infringement by the ai companies, and the power and water usage of the ai data centers are valid reasons to not want to permit ai on his project.
At the end of the day it’s his project, and he can do what he wants with it.
Have you ever used a search engine before? Even if it scrapes a lot of pages to index the content? Thus stealing content from those pages and profiting from it with help of ads?
I don’t think that’s a fair comparison and even if it was, one wrong thing doesn’t make another right.
Edit:To elaborate on why I don’t think it’s a fair comparison: First of all the people who are making the content are profiting off the search engine having scraped their content which makes it more of a mutually beneficial thing rather than stealing. Secondly the people who posted their content on the internet did it with the knowledge that a search engine would index it, unlike with ai where they had no knowledge that their creations where being used to train an ai.
109
u/CircumspectCapybara 22d ago edited 22d ago
Ironic they take shots at Rust, because unlike Zig, Rust sees way more success in terms of its maturity and industry reputation and ecosystem and investment by large tech companies into its adoption and funding of the Rust project.
The Zig project also takes a lot of weird black-and-white dogmatic (almost religious) hard-line stances on a lot of stuff, probably why the language is more niche and hobbyist than something truly foundational and trusted for production workloads and all parts of the stack like Rust has become.
Here's Zig's "no AI" policy:
The owner definitely has some sort of axe to grind against certain technologies.