Some people don't want to read anything these days, suspecting an LLM. Not code. Not ideas. Nothing. They're weary of LLM-generated writing.
Guess what else the LLM generated. An entire compiler for a new language. Over 7 months of work went into that, iterating, fixing bugs, simplifying. It generates WASM you can run in your browser. All you have to do is visit the playground. It's the big button that says "Try it in your browser." But, that playground and the backend was also generated by an LLM (as I iterated for a few months on it).
I couldn't get it any simpler. The landing page has big letters on the top. It has tiny code snippets illustrating what the language is like. Oh well. I tried.
Your copy and design is very obviously LLM-generated and full of technical fluff, which unfortunately distracts from any novel technical merits. That's the double-edged sword of marketing, and why simple high-signal copy and examples are often better for technical writing.
For example, you most definitely don't need 6 cards for each header point: it's actively tiring to read.
EDIT: I didn't see you mock me in the other thread: therefore, I will not engage further.
Just because LLMs can write copy for webpages doesn't mean they should. A landing page should not warrant a tl;dr.
Some people don't want to read anything these days, suspecting an LLM. Not code. Not ideas. Nothing. They're weary of LLM-generated writing.
Guess what else the LLM generated. An entire compiler for a new language. Over 7 months of work went into that, iterating, fixing bugs, simplifying. It generates WASM you can run in your browser. All you have to do is visit the playground. It's the big button that says "Try it in your browser." But, that playground and the backend was also generated by an LLM (as I iterated for a few months on it).
I couldn't get it any simpler. The landing page has big letters on the top. It has tiny code snippets illustrating what the language is like. Oh well. I tried.
Your copy and design is very obviously LLM-generated and full of technical fluff, which unfortunately distracts from any novel technical merits. That's the double-edged sword of marketing, and why simple high-signal copy and examples are often better for technical writing.
For example, you most definitely don't need 6 cards for each header point: it's actively tiring to read.
EDIT: I didn't see you mock me in the other thread: therefore, I will not engage further.