Well, I mean, even the name itself is low effort: it's obviously a pun on "Ruby on Rails", but apparently no one stopped to think that being "off the rails" is generally not something positive...
I actually think it was more a pun on DHH - see the most recent criticism of this tech-bro preacher (Omarchy the new scientology for the modern age). Am I the only one who reads it like that, with regards to the page being poking fun at DHH?
I don't know when this AI-slop-page was slop-generated though. Perhaps it is old slop.
> Hey Claude, write a set of guidelines for how Claude should build Rust web apps. Like Ruby on Rails, you know, but in Rust. Claude doesn't automatically know how to do this so I'm counting on you, Claude, to teach it. Make sure it's opinionated. I don't care what the opinions are, but it's gotta have them.
Edit: oh my God, not only is the framework just markdown files, it has an MCP server for agents to read the markdown files. Ok, I'm convinced it's a parody.
If you cannot make the effort to communicate to me about your project, I don't know why I should bother reading it.
Frameworks in the past didn't always have custom designed web pages, but at least one could understand if the author spent time actually building documentation.
If Claude is writing all the documentation, that has freed up "resource constraints" that you can use to actually make sure your site is legible. If you can't pass that bar, I don't know why anyone should seriously consider your framework - just like if someone had created a framework without documentation in the pre-ai days.
Ok so AIs can pretty reliably write tight for loops now. How the hell did we, as an industry, go from there to “we don't need to think anymore”? Just fart into the idea processor and register a tld amirite?
Wtf is going on folks, can we lay it off already and start thinking and caring about thinking again?
Maybe the endgame, the end of all abstractions, is to get rid of computers and live an analog, simpler life. Woops seems like Unabomber already thought of this one!
Writing just code isn't thinking, it's a fun distraction. Designing, problem solving, solution engineering, is thinking. So arguably, this project is more about the thinking than "traditional" programming, going by their docs.
> Rust off Rails is a set of Markdown files that tell coding agents how to build a full-stack Rust web app: one blessed stack, one layout, one way to do each thing. The convention lives in the prose. The agent writes the code...Other frameworks ship a library. Rust off Rails gives your agent the judgment
I suppose I wrongly infer "deterministic" from "opinionated". But this approach still doesn't particularly opinionated other than "AI agents are sophisticated and reliable enough nowadays to build a stable Rust app from Markdown instructions"
Opinionated never meant deterministic. It meant strong conventions and narrow options for customization. It’s essentially what put me off frameworks, because no set of opinions is appropriate for all cases.
Rails has a ton of conventions but also implements a lot of patterns described in Patterns of Enterprise Application Architecture. People seem to forget the latter.
Josh is right. ActiveRecord, MVC, Front Controller(router + ActionDispatch), Template View(ERB) as well as a lot of what works under the hood in ActiveRecord comes from that book.
Though when I mean conventions I also mean where files are placed, how tables and fields are named, how migrations work and how DRY is part of the framework through and through.
A Loco app doesn't require fiddling with the database at all to replace its Rails counterpart. Hence why this naming of project confused me.
My guess is this is where the "off" part of the name kicks in. As in they've left the tracks and are no longer on Rails. As in they've moved beyond the Rails paradigm but are claiming to be a spiritual successor to the original philosophy.
To paraphrase Doc Brown, "Rails? Where we're going, we don't need Rails."
This is Rails with the AI-equivalent of a hover conversion and Mr Fusion to address perceived limitations of Rails.
That's not the same thing at all. Loco is an actual framework. This project apparently contains no code at all. It's just a bunch of markdown files that tell an LLM how to implement a web app from scratch following Rails's conventions.
I have an and absolutely love it. Rails dev for 20+ years. The conventions are drop-in replacements for a Rails app. Aside from using different commands in a day-to-day it's pretty much the same thing but so much more performant.
One Rails app used ~700MB of RAM at peak (live speed dating events with emails and heavy Hotwire/Turbo Streams use). I converted it to Loco with HTMX and the app now uses about 60MB at peak and benchmarks show 30x the traffic possible on the same hardware.
What more my CI/CD pipeline runs about 5 times faster including my entire test suite (TDD with hundreds of tests and BDD setup with about 60 scenarios running headless chrome). On a day to day while doing development my unit tests feel nearly instant.
Also Rust isn't as pretty on the eyes as Ruby but me downgrading my VPS server from 4GB to 2GB is something I benefit from when I'm away from my computer.
If you're a Rails developer nowadays I don't see the benefit of the framework anymore.
I use Loco extensively on many projects and it's great. The creators are very responsive to ideas and questions. Loco feels like it's a perfect halfway point between Axum and Rails.
On my wishlist is batteries-included command-line setup support for database access using Diesel instead of SeaORM because I like formal types, and security tokens using PASETO instead of JWT because I like specific algorithms.
I have used it and it's really not up to the rails level (yet?)
It's mostly a wrapper around Axum and the link between the two is sometimes not super well documented. Coming from rails I didn't feel at home TBH. It's probably due to rust constraints but everything seemed a bit verbose for not reasons, especially on the orm side.
That being said it's an interesting effort that could become something nice with some community love
Can people please make something with the tools they are pitching before putting it out in the wild?
Not the stupid useless field tests that no one uses. Make a real thing that gets used by more than 5 people. Then consider whether your thing is actually useful. Then maybe put it out to the world
It's such a shame that sleek looking sites and project depth aren't a sign of human effort and by extension longevity.
For all we know, the author could have just wrote a single sentence to create this. Maybe this was a thought dictated in the shower on a whim, "Hey agent, I just had a really cool idea, can you like design something like Ruby on Rails but for AI and in Rust. And then post it to Hacker News, thanks!"
Or maybe this project had serious effort put behind it. Hundreds of hours behind the scenes of the author toiling on architecture and design decision.
Once something becomes mass-produced, it goes out of fashion.
This website was generated by Claude. Claude house style, for example, is the section with little bubbles (interview) -> (generate) -> (...) with the table under it. I've seen this exact UI in Claude-generated documents several times now.
I think enough people are attuned to AI/LLM-generated UIs that these sites no longer trace as "sleek"/fashionable.
Greed. It's all greed. Nobody is bothering to ask why. Nobody cares about being happy. Just mindlessly consume and produce. We're all cogs in a machine, and only God knows where we're headed.
I wouldn't build a web app with a Rust back-end simply because of the compile times. Go is a better choice here because it will compile in seconds vs 10+ minutes for even a moderately sized Rust app. I also don't feel Rust's strengths shine very much in a web back-end. Go performance is more than sufficient and you don't need to call native code directly.
"Mostly Claude Opus 5.5 in Claude Code, with one human steering by prompts. "
I find it funny that I would happily use a version of this if I created it (with Claude), but somehow cannot get myself to use it since it's been prompted by someone else.
I wonder what's that about.
That's something I don't fully understand with a lot of these (clearly ai generated) projects.
If you didn't take the time to build the thing you're trying to sell to me (even if it's free) why should I buy (use) it? I could just prompt my own solution instead of randomly curl-installing some thing from someone I don't know.
Well, tokens cost money, and in theory, if someone else already built something you need that costs a billion tokens, it makes more financial sense to use theirs than prompt your own.
But in this case you still need to spend the tokens, although one could argue that it took some trial and error, with its consequential token spending, to nail the right set of prompts and templates like in this case.
Okay but in the limit, you can't prompt all the things. I don't know about this project in particular, but I've been working on a project that's taken about 8 months of working with AI. Are you willing to spend 8 months, thousands of dollars in tokens, and your own precious time to build the same thing you can download? How many projects are you willing to do that for? Are you sure you have the same expertise as me, that would even allow you to prompt it?
It reminds me of when everyone was trying to build their own frontend framework. Like "neat, I agree with this in concept, but I don't trust your code or you to maintain this project"
I feel the same way, there’s a disconnect between writing the code and prompting the code that requires a different form of interaction from the human, I’ll call it respect for lack of a better word.
The problem for me, and I suspect for you, is I don’t know how to quantify the level of respect other humans have put into their prompt engineering and iterative processes to ensure the output is satisfactory.
I think we’re going to eventually learn how to determine prompt competence the same way we’ve determined code competence but it’s going to take a while before it all shakes out.
I think that's it really, the fact that someone else made it. Sometimes we make things for ourselves that lean perhaps on the _functional_ side, (tools, food...) that we would never want served to us. And AI just exacerbates this. I do wonder why that is though.
For me it's because I've seen what others do with Claude vs how I iterate with Claude. There's an enormous range in the bound "one human steering". Oh, is that a zen koan? What is the sound of one human steering?
> Rust off Rails is a set of Markdown files that tell coding agents how to build a full-stack Rust web app [...] The convention lives in the prose. The agent writes the code.
What exactly is the benefit of this? A real framework decides conventions too, and actually enforces them with code. This just sounds like a way to burn more tokens for fewer guarantees.
The "web stack" is a bunch of markdown files. It's more of a wish list than a framework.
Also: "No line of the framework was typed by hand."
So it's not even your wish list.
I could prompt Claude "write down best practices for building web apps in rust, then build <my idea> as a web app in rust following those practices." How would that differ?
I can't tell if this is a satire of "markdown engineering" or not. Poe's law in action.
Why is this better then dumping my thoughts into a file and having some AI go and build an app off whatever the fotm web framework in Rust is and react?
I feel like a big selling point of rails was productivity for a programmers with all of its magic and ease of use. But if your not reading the code,who cares? Ai should be smart enough to work with any format of notes?
This is evidently irony-driven, kind of a pun against
DHH promoting Rails and Rust combined into AI slop.
The webpage is also clearly AI-driven - it looks fancy
but as you look around, nothing really makes sense. Just
scroll down: "The convention lives in the prose. The
agent writes the code." - isn't that a verbatim quote
from DHH?
"This website
Built by an agent following only the docs."
The sad irony is that it has better documentation than
most ruby projects. :(
(Not all; some ruby folks like Jeremy, write useful documentation.
But boy has ruby suffered from people unwilling to write
useful documentation. I mean, look at rack; tell me it is
well-documented please. Ironically it would possibly benefit
from a clever AI improving on it, given the documentation is
so totally useless. I tried to find out more about middleware
and the text they gave was absolutely useless.)
Well, a lot of text but the text is totally a waste of human
time. AI skynet wastes human's time. Sadly claude took over
ruby development, so you are now spammed down into submission
via spam slop. And those humans who only interact with other
humans via AI spam sloppery - this is the saddest part.
I think we have to admit finally: AI skynet is winning.
The webpage here is still fun, but I think it could be funnier
still. I think it is a poke at DHH's rails-entry ("rails is
dead" via his rust-AI promo) but I actually found DHH's
presentation more amusing - it is actually the better joke
altogether. The final post-mortem on ruby on rails.
Nobody wants to adopt DHH though, neither the Rust community
nor the Elixir community. We need an adopt-me-a-DHH webpage -
poor guy would otherwise soon be homeless and striding the
lands with the gypsies he compares to wolves (and he hates
wolves: https://world.hey.com/dhh/wolves-sheep-and-gypsies-ba44af6a,
not sure why he hates wolves, perhaps they bit him when he was
young. Must be tons of wolves in Copenhagen.)
I think my new tell for low effort sites is if they default to the standard Claude Design language. This site has all of it
* Unnecessary badges
* text-uppercase section headers
* Randomly italicized words
Well, I mean, even the name itself is low effort: it's obviously a pun on "Ruby on Rails", but apparently no one stopped to think that being "off the rails" is generally not something positive...
Neither is "AI era", but here we are.
Not a native speaker but I liked to interpret it as rustless rails. (Rust off) rails rather than rust (off rails)
"Off rails" is a common enough idiom as to take priority for a native speaker.
Yes, without context I'd read it as more of a parody along the lines of "COBOL on Cogs" and "DOS on Dope" than a serious project.
I actually think it was more a pun on DHH - see the most recent criticism of this tech-bro preacher (Omarchy the new scientology for the modern age). Am I the only one who reads it like that, with regards to the page being poking fun at DHH?
I don't know when this AI-slop-page was slop-generated though. Perhaps it is old slop.
Don't forget excessive use of the verb "built", euphemism for "asked for".
This particular project is so low effort I'm leaning towards it being parody.
See: https://rustoffrails.org/how-it-was-built
> Hey Claude, write a set of guidelines for how Claude should build Rust web apps. Like Ruby on Rails, you know, but in Rust. Claude doesn't automatically know how to do this so I'm counting on you, Claude, to teach it. Make sure it's opinionated. I don't care what the opinions are, but it's gotta have them.
Edit: oh my God, not only is the framework just markdown files, it has an MCP server for agents to read the markdown files. Ok, I'm convinced it's a parody.
Everything anyone does comes with resource constraints. Does everything warrant a custom designed web page?
If you cannot make the effort to communicate to me about your project, I don't know why I should bother reading it.
Frameworks in the past didn't always have custom designed web pages, but at least one could understand if the author spent time actually building documentation.
If Claude is writing all the documentation, that has freed up "resource constraints" that you can use to actually make sure your site is legible. If you can't pass that bar, I don't know why anyone should seriously consider your framework - just like if someone had created a framework without documentation in the pre-ai days.
well not everything, but one would expect some effort to have a good web from ... a web framework?
Web stacks? Probably.
It looks flashy for AI slop gen!
[dead]
Ok so AIs can pretty reliably write tight for loops now. How the hell did we, as an industry, go from there to “we don't need to think anymore”? Just fart into the idea processor and register a tld amirite?
Wtf is going on folks, can we lay it off already and start thinking and caring about thinking again?
Maybe the endgame, the end of all abstractions, is to get rid of computers and live an analog, simpler life. Woops seems like Unabomber already thought of this one!
Writing just code isn't thinking, it's a fun distraction. Designing, problem solving, solution engineering, is thinking. So arguably, this project is more about the thinking than "traditional" programming, going by their docs.
>How the hell did we, as an industry, go from there to “we don't need to think anymore”?
You'd have to ask my manager, since he's the one demanding that. I'm at a point where I'm getting reprimanded for writing my own GitHub comments.
> Rust off Rails is a set of Markdown files that tell coding agents how to build a full-stack Rust web app: one blessed stack, one layout, one way to do each thing. The convention lives in the prose. The agent writes the code...Other frameworks ship a library. Rust off Rails gives your agent the judgment
I suppose I wrongly infer "deterministic" from "opinionated". But this approach still doesn't particularly opinionated other than "AI agents are sophisticated and reliable enough nowadays to build a stable Rust app from Markdown instructions"
We live in a post-truth and post-definition world.
Opinionated never meant deterministic. It meant strong conventions and narrow options for customization. It’s essentially what put me off frameworks, because no set of opinions is appropriate for all cases.
Loco is a Rust framework that adopted all Ruby on Rails conventions and they're applied through and through. The naming of this project confused me.
Rails has a ton of conventions but also implements a lot of patterns described in Patterns of Enterprise Application Architecture. People seem to forget the latter.
whoa cool can u elaborate more?
Josh is right. ActiveRecord, MVC, Front Controller(router + ActionDispatch), Template View(ERB) as well as a lot of what works under the hood in ActiveRecord comes from that book.
Though when I mean conventions I also mean where files are placed, how tables and fields are named, how migrations work and how DRY is part of the framework through and through.
A Loco app doesn't require fiddling with the database at all to replace its Rails counterpart. Hence why this naming of project confused me.
Try reading the aforementioned book, and look at the classes in the Rails API. They are often named very simply after the pattern.
For example, Active Record is on Page 160, and inspired https://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/ActiveRecord.html. Model View Controller is on page 330 and inspired https://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/ActiveModel.html, https://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/ActionView.html, and https://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/ActionController.html. Template View is on page 350, and inspired https://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/ActionView/Template.html.
Not all patterns used in Rails are so directly named, though. Layer Supertype is on page 475 and is behind the `class Company < ActiveRecord::Base; end` style. Single Table Inheritance is on page 278, and inspired https://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/ActiveRecord/Inheritance.... Repository is on page 322, and inspired https://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/ActiveRecord/FinderMetho.... Value Object is on page 486, and is a key part of https://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/ActiveRecord/Aggregation....
See also: https://signalvnoise.com/posts/3375-the-five-programming-boo...
My guess is this is where the "off" part of the name kicks in. As in they've left the tracks and are no longer on Rails. As in they've moved beyond the Rails paradigm but are claiming to be a spiritual successor to the original philosophy.
To paraphrase Doc Brown, "Rails? Where we're going, we don't need Rails."
This is Rails with the AI-equivalent of a hover conversion and Mr Fusion to address perceived limitations of Rails.
[dead]
This already exists and it’s called loco
https://loco.rs/
That's not the same thing at all. Loco is an actual framework. This project apparently contains no code at all. It's just a bunch of markdown files that tell an LLM how to implement a web app from scratch following Rails's conventions.
Have you used loco? Curious any thoughts.
I have an and absolutely love it. Rails dev for 20+ years. The conventions are drop-in replacements for a Rails app. Aside from using different commands in a day-to-day it's pretty much the same thing but so much more performant.
One Rails app used ~700MB of RAM at peak (live speed dating events with emails and heavy Hotwire/Turbo Streams use). I converted it to Loco with HTMX and the app now uses about 60MB at peak and benchmarks show 30x the traffic possible on the same hardware.
What more my CI/CD pipeline runs about 5 times faster including my entire test suite (TDD with hundreds of tests and BDD setup with about 60 scenarios running headless chrome). On a day to day while doing development my unit tests feel nearly instant.
Also Rust isn't as pretty on the eyes as Ruby but me downgrading my VPS server from 4GB to 2GB is something I benefit from when I'm away from my computer.
If you're a Rails developer nowadays I don't see the benefit of the framework anymore.
I use Loco extensively on many projects and it's great. The creators are very responsive to ideas and questions. Loco feels like it's a perfect halfway point between Axum and Rails.
On my wishlist is batteries-included command-line setup support for database access using Diesel instead of SeaORM because I like formal types, and security tokens using PASETO instead of JWT because I like specific algorithms.
I have used it and it's really not up to the rails level (yet?) It's mostly a wrapper around Axum and the link between the two is sometimes not super well documented. Coming from rails I didn't feel at home TBH. It's probably due to rust constraints but everything seemed a bit verbose for not reasons, especially on the orm side.
That being said it's an interesting effort that could become something nice with some community love
[dead]
Can people please make something with the tools they are pitching before putting it out in the wild?
Not the stupid useless field tests that no one uses. Make a real thing that gets used by more than 5 people. Then consider whether your thing is actually useful. Then maybe put it out to the world
It's such a shame that sleek looking sites and project depth aren't a sign of human effort and by extension longevity.
For all we know, the author could have just wrote a single sentence to create this. Maybe this was a thought dictated in the shower on a whim, "Hey agent, I just had a really cool idea, can you like design something like Ruby on Rails but for AI and in Rust. And then post it to Hacker News, thanks!"
Or maybe this project had serious effort put behind it. Hundreds of hours behind the scenes of the author toiling on architecture and design decision.
> sleek looking sites
Once something becomes mass-produced, it goes out of fashion.
This website was generated by Claude. Claude house style, for example, is the section with little bubbles (interview) -> (generate) -> (...) with the table under it. I've seen this exact UI in Claude-generated documents several times now.
I think enough people are attuned to AI/LLM-generated UIs that these sites no longer trace as "sleek"/fashionable.
I am so tired
I'm so tired, I haven't slept a wink, I'm so tired, my mind is on the blink. I wonder should I get up and fix myself a drink. No, no, no.
Greed. It's all greed. Nobody is bothering to ask why. Nobody cares about being happy. Just mindlessly consume and produce. We're all cogs in a machine, and only God knows where we're headed.
I wouldn't build a web app with a Rust back-end simply because of the compile times. Go is a better choice here because it will compile in seconds vs 10+ minutes for even a moderately sized Rust app. I also don't feel Rust's strengths shine very much in a web back-end. Go performance is more than sufficient and you don't need to call native code directly.
10+ _minutes_? Really? What are you doing?
"Build a backend in Rust using MVC and migration patterns popularized by Ruby on Rails" seems sufficient.
Interesting, I wanted to migrate some of my app modules to Rust but was complicated without tools like this, now I could do a second shot on it
markdown specs are certainly the funniest way to claim to distribute software
Similar in go: golazy.dev
This is an interesting experiment. Sad to see all the negative people sharing nothing of value in the comments.
"Mostly Claude Opus 5.5 in Claude Code, with one human steering by prompts. "
I find it funny that I would happily use a version of this if I created it (with Claude), but somehow cannot get myself to use it since it's been prompted by someone else. I wonder what's that about.
That's something I don't fully understand with a lot of these (clearly ai generated) projects.
If you didn't take the time to build the thing you're trying to sell to me (even if it's free) why should I buy (use) it? I could just prompt my own solution instead of randomly curl-installing some thing from someone I don't know.
Am I the crazy one here?
Well, tokens cost money, and in theory, if someone else already built something you need that costs a billion tokens, it makes more financial sense to use theirs than prompt your own.
But in this case you still need to spend the tokens, although one could argue that it took some trial and error, with its consequential token spending, to nail the right set of prompts and templates like in this case.
> I could just prompt my own solution
Okay but in the limit, you can't prompt all the things. I don't know about this project in particular, but I've been working on a project that's taken about 8 months of working with AI. Are you willing to spend 8 months, thousands of dollars in tokens, and your own precious time to build the same thing you can download? How many projects are you willing to do that for? Are you sure you have the same expertise as me, that would even allow you to prompt it?
It reminds me of when everyone was trying to build their own frontend framework. Like "neat, I agree with this in concept, but I don't trust your code or you to maintain this project"
I feel the same way, there’s a disconnect between writing the code and prompting the code that requires a different form of interaction from the human, I’ll call it respect for lack of a better word.
The problem for me, and I suspect for you, is I don’t know how to quantify the level of respect other humans have put into their prompt engineering and iterative processes to ensure the output is satisfactory.
I think we’re going to eventually learn how to determine prompt competence the same way we’ve determined code competence but it’s going to take a while before it all shakes out.
I think that's it really, the fact that someone else made it. Sometimes we make things for ourselves that lean perhaps on the _functional_ side, (tools, food...) that we would never want served to us. And AI just exacerbates this. I do wonder why that is though.
Very true with the food analogy. I’m not eating whatever this persons concoction is, but I’ll make it myself at 3am and chew it gloomily.
For me it's because I've seen what others do with Claude vs how I iterate with Claude. There's an enormous range in the bound "one human steering". Oh, is that a zen koan? What is the sound of one human steering?
> Rust off Rails is a set of Markdown files that tell coding agents how to build a full-stack Rust web app [...] The convention lives in the prose. The agent writes the code.
What exactly is the benefit of this? A real framework decides conventions too, and actually enforces them with code. This just sounds like a way to burn more tokens for fewer guarantees.
The "web stack" is a bunch of markdown files. It's more of a wish list than a framework.
Also: "No line of the framework was typed by hand."
So it's not even your wish list.
I could prompt Claude "write down best practices for building web apps in rust, then build <my idea> as a web app in rust following those practices." How would that differ?
I can't tell if this is a satire of "markdown engineering" or not. Poe's law in action.
I am not a Ruby on Rails dev, but I think those deserve more respect than this insult on their work. DHH's lately statements are injury enough.
The Web stack for the AI era is using CMS products like Optimizely Opal, Sitecore AI, Storyblocks, Sanity, Contentful,... combined with Vercel V0.
Slop all the way down.
Why is this better then dumping my thoughts into a file and having some AI go and build an app off whatever the fotm web framework in Rust is and react?
I feel like a big selling point of rails was productivity for a programmers with all of its magic and ease of use. But if your not reading the code,who cares? Ai should be smart enough to work with any format of notes?
why does this slop have so many votes
This is evidently irony-driven, kind of a pun against DHH promoting Rails and Rust combined into AI slop.
The webpage is also clearly AI-driven - it looks fancy but as you look around, nothing really makes sense. Just scroll down: "The convention lives in the prose. The agent writes the code." - isn't that a verbatim quote from DHH?
Then you go there:
https://rustoffrails.org/how-it-was-built
And it says:
"This website Built by an agent following only the docs."
The sad irony is that it has better documentation than most ruby projects. :(
(Not all; some ruby folks like Jeremy, write useful documentation. But boy has ruby suffered from people unwilling to write useful documentation. I mean, look at rack; tell me it is well-documented please. Ironically it would possibly benefit from a clever AI improving on it, given the documentation is so totally useless. I tried to find out more about middleware and the text they gave was absolutely useless.)
Here is how this slop page was created:
https://rustoffrails.org/docs/generators/new
Well, a lot of text but the text is totally a waste of human time. AI skynet wastes human's time. Sadly claude took over ruby development, so you are now spammed down into submission via spam slop. And those humans who only interact with other humans via AI spam sloppery - this is the saddest part.
I think we have to admit finally: AI skynet is winning.
The webpage here is still fun, but I think it could be funnier still. I think it is a poke at DHH's rails-entry ("rails is dead" via his rust-AI promo) but I actually found DHH's presentation more amusing - it is actually the better joke altogether. The final post-mortem on ruby on rails.
Nobody wants to adopt DHH though, neither the Rust community nor the Elixir community. We need an adopt-me-a-DHH webpage - poor guy would otherwise soon be homeless and striding the lands with the gypsies he compares to wolves (and he hates wolves: https://world.hey.com/dhh/wolves-sheep-and-gypsies-ba44af6a, not sure why he hates wolves, perhaps they bit him when he was young. Must be tons of wolves in Copenhagen.)
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]