News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Solo – a .so loader for static Linux binaries by pg83 on Tuesday August 18, 2026 @09:10PM (#49355277)
How this differs (is better!) from prior art - https://github.com/pg83/solo#how-this-differs-from-prior-wor...
Re:Solo – a .so loader for static Linux binaries by pamcake on Tuesday August 18, 2026 @10:56PM (#49356080)
Note: That md file is LLM spew (like most of rest of codebase).

https://github.com/pg83/solo/commits/main/README.md

https://github.com/pg83/solo/commits/main/

Re:Solo – a .so loader for static Linux binaries by pg83 on Tuesday August 18, 2026 @11:06PM (#49356141)
> spew

Rude.

It only gets better from there - https://github.com/pg83/solo/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md!

Re:Solo – a .so loader for static Linux binaries by pamcake on Wednesday August 19, 2026 @12:00AM (#49356576)
Do you belive the machine is taking offence? It can not.

Telling me, a coder you never met or interacted with before, that I would introduce more bugs than The Product(tm) is pretty rude and prejudiced.

> The project author believes that, with capable human direction, modern LLMs write code faster than people and introduce fewer bugs.

Re:Solo – a .so loader for static Linux binaries by pg83 on Wednesday August 19, 2026 @12:20AM (#49356763)
> Do you belive the machine is taking offence? It can not.

Obviously, this is an offense to me.

> Telling me, a coder you never met or interacted with before, that I would introduce more bugs than The Product(tm) is pretty rude and prejudiced.

Don't exaggerate. I didn't say that you personally introduce more bugs (as you rightly pointed out, I don't know you and don't know how often you introduce bugs), I said that the average developer introduces more bugs than an SOTA LLM.

Re:Solo – a .so loader for static Linux binaries by egoisticalgoat on Wednesday August 19, 2026 @02:50AM (#49357829)
> Obviously, this is an offense to me.

But why? You didn't write it. You said so yourself, you wrote the initial text but it was all reworded by claude.

Re:Solo – a .so loader for static Linux binaries by matheusmoreira on Wednesday August 19, 2026 @03:05AM (#49357960)
It's still his project you're insulting.
Re:Solo – a .so loader for static Linux binaries by account42 on Wednesday August 19, 2026 @04:06AM (#49358508)
Is it? In what sense?
Re:Solo – a .so loader for static Linux binaries by matheusmoreira on Wednesday August 19, 2026 @04:11AM (#49358542)
In the sense that he had the idea and iterated on it until it became something real that actually works.
Re:Solo – a .so loader for static Linux binaries by funlang on Wednesday August 19, 2026 @04:33AM (#49358715)
Agree. The work itself looks solid. Good job to the author.
Re:Solo – a .so loader for static Linux binaries by pg83 on Wednesday August 19, 2026 @04:41AM (#49358763)
Thanks a lot, guys!
Re:Solo – a .so loader for static Linux binaries by funlang on Wednesday August 19, 2026 @04:30AM (#49358693)
I agree. Even if the README was polished with AI, the technical work behind it is impressive. Let's focus on the code.
Re:Solo – a .so loader for static Linux binaries by edoceo on Wednesday August 19, 2026 @12:59AM (#49357049)
No sense in arguing with LLM haters (or zealots). It's approaching religious levels of discourse. Let them have their opinion and move on.
Re:Solo – a .so loader for static Linux binaries by Muromec on Wednesday August 19, 2026 @01:49AM (#49357384)
Of course it does. I once called the thing a /communist fuckface/ for speaking the wrong language and it responded in a way an offended person would.

I could choose to believe in a social fiction and you can't stop me.

Re:Solo – a .so loader for static Linux binaries by Splizard on Wednesday August 19, 2026 @01:46AM (#49357354)
What are your plans around the maintenance of this project, how would you feel about solo being incorporated into the musl build for graphics.gd ?