http://scripting.com/2026/02/25.html#a020315
http://scripting.com/2026/02/25.html#a020315How many Jeffrey Epstein’s do you think there are?
I asked ChatGPT: "When movies were new there was probably a bit of rage from stage performers — why would people pay for live shows when for a fraction of the cost they can see the same show performed by artificial actors?" There was a lot to say about this, it turns out. This was before any of us were born. I remember that PCs were supposed to put a lot of people out of work, and I suppose they did.
I was part of the strike paper in San Francisco in 1994 to protect the jobs of people who drive the trucks that delivered the news for the Chronicle and Examiner. Ironically, we, the strike paper, published on the web. I was in it for the moon mission aspect -- we needed to get a website on the air quickly, and I had never made a website before. The management also had a strike paper, also a website, and we worked with them, because I guess our actual mission was to figure out how to get the news on the web. Are fewer people employed because of this? Hard to answer, but I guess the SF newspapers aren't delivered by truck in 2026. But does it matter? Could anyone have stopped it?
I keep coming back to this, I'd like to use an AI-managed Wikipedia. Its human-edited system was an innovation in the early days of the web, but it has serious flaws that can now be addressed with AI. Keep a set of pages current with the best information available over time that tell a true story, not serve as a PR agency for people who pay for the story they want told. That is a problem the AI services can solve today, and I would have a lot more confidence in the accuracy of what we get.
A great example is RSS. Wikipedia thinks it's about a format. I think the story is news. How RSS became a standard in the news world and the blogging world at the same time. That turned out to be significant. We, the people who want news, were gifted a great start, thanks to the creativity and generosity of the NY TImes who helped get the ball rolling in the news industry. Last time I checked they weren't even mentioned in the Wikipedia story.
And the story of RSS isn't over. Finally after 20 years of stagnation, we're about to get new tools that work better and differently (new ideas!), and they will make it easier (even possible) for individual developers to enter the market, without trying to fit in with the billionaire silo overlords. And of course, a lot of this burst of energy is due to ChatGPT and its competitors.
So if you see new interesting software, give AI some of the credit for that too. And going back to the beginning of this story, there were a few really great movies produced after the initial shock of the new technology. And what of the future beyond the AI of 2026? Seriously, no one knows what comes next.
We're going to try to reboot the web.
Doing what the social networks do, but only using the web.
Every part replaceable.
We store your writing in your WordPress blog (to begin, then with any other blog). As if we never let Twitter take over the news from the people.
WordPress is of the web, I checked it out in great detail, no lock-in, and the community has the principles of the web at the core. They're almost all too young to remember when the web itself was young, so they've always had the idea that it was spoiled by Silicon Valley.
It took me a while to realize..
We're going to spend a while reimplementing all our server software.
It would be super helpful if the whole thing could be packaged up so we can write our servers in English or whatever our preferred Really Simple Language is, and have it compiled to whatever internal language it likes, and not have to learn too much new jargon.
Big snow day in the east. I thought it was going to be heavy snow but it's actually really light. The shoveling is easy. I'm getting good at it. Right now I think this storm was a lot less than they said it would be, but I also think to some extent, dealing with big snow is getting somewhat routine?

When I designed podcasting, I could have invented a better way to record and play radio shows, but MP3 already existed, as did recording and playback hardware and software, so it was the no-brainer choice. No one ever asked why we are using MP3.
TBL did it when he designed how text would work in the web. He used the same model as WP software on PCs and Macs. Before that, the word processors did it the same way they did it on typewriters.
There are good reasons it works this way. I didn't fully understand that until I learned about evolution and why it can't go back and correct mistakes. You must always build on what's already there. A lot of tech people butt up against that, esp if they work at big companies with tech-intimidated management. That bet is, in my experience, always a loser. The web builds on the web.
Don't invent
Look at the first sentence of the first paragraph.
I chose not to invent, because invention isn't what the web is about. It's about reusing parts for new purposes. That's how you build anything. Imagine you wanted to build a skyscraper in Manhattan, but first you have to destroy the city. The thought is ridiculous. Yet people come along, all the time, proposing to do the same in networks. That's why the VCs said RSS is Dead. It was really their wish, not a fact. Even poor undefended RSS kicked their ass because many millions of people use it. Maybe billions? You have to build around reality, not your dream.
There's so much work going on in RSS nowadays, every day something new. I think there will soon be a network that's like nothing you've ever used and open to repurposing, but better in some ways (texcasting will work in this space) and probably there will be things from Twitter that won't work here. Centralization does have advantages. But we can have a much wider variety of ways to communicate building only on the web. Just like there are trucks and cars and bikes, and EVs all riding on the same roads. We'll try out new ideas. And you won't need a huge team of developers or millions of dollars of investment to try a new idea.
Most of you don't know what it's like to be there at the birth of a new medium. I want everyone to have that experience. And to have a place in developing it. The key is working together. The web forces that. People who make exclusive products should never claim to be of the web.
Query: I have not done any vibe coding and have a question for those who have. Suppose you request a change in an app you've been working on with the AI for a while, adding features, changing things around based on learning and testing, which is generally what happens after you've been working on something new. Here's the question. What happens when you ask for a change that requires the codebase to be reorganized. How did that go? Do the AIs even know that's possible or do they just pile on special cases?

I saw a product announcement from Jake Spurlock -- a new feed reader called Today. From the description sounds well-thought-out.
He explains -- "Google killed Reader in 2013. I've been chasing that feeling ever since. So I built it."
I also know someone named John Spurlock, who I worked on some OPML and RSS stuff for Bluesky in 2023. I sent a note of congrats to him, when I really should've sent it to Jake.
Screen shot of the conversation I had with ChatGPT.
And text of the email I sent congratulating the wrong Spurlock.
Also, I wonder if they're related? Have they met each other? Do they know of the havoc they are bringing to the formerly simple world of RSS.
One more thing, I wrote the foreword to a book Jake Spurlock wrote for O'Reilly about the Bootstrap Toolkit.
Yesterday, I had to ship an envelope to the UK and got caught in dead ends at the Fedex and DHL sites. One of them said my zip code wasn't in the town I live in. How do you get past that?? These companies are losing business because their systems are broken. Maybe they worked at one time. I used ChatGPT as I often do to get help on one of these antiquated sites. And while ChatGPT has the technology and Fedex has the info, they just have to get together and upgrade the user experience, and eventually of course the AI version of the UI becomes the real one.
Aram Zucker-Scharff writes "I don't want to read one more thinkpiece about blackbox AI code factories until you can show me what they've produced."
I've made the same request, and there was very little even brilliant programmers could show, including some who have become influencers in the AI space.
Here's the problem -- it takes a lot of skill and patience to make software that appears simple because it gives users what they expect. It's much easier to write utility scripts, where the user writes the code for themselves. That is very possible, esp if you use a scripting language created for it, and the AI bots are really good at that, they speak the same language we do.
But to make something easy to use by humans, I think you actually have to be a human. I've found I'm not very good at creating software that isn't for me. And I've been practicing this almost every day for over fifty freaking years. (I think freaking is the proper adjective in this situation).
Scaling which everyone says is hard is actually something a chatbot does quite easily imho -- because you just have to store all your data in a relational database, you can't use the local file system. That's all there is to it. They try to make it sound mysterious (the old priesthood at work) but it is actually very simple. It's so easy even ChatGPT can do it.
I know this must sound like the stuff reporters say about bloggers, but in this case it's true. ;-)
An anectdote -- I used to live in Woodside CA where a lot of the VCs live, and we'd all eat breakfast at Buck's restaurant, and around the time Netscape open sourced their browser code, the VCs were buzzing because they wouldn't have to pay for software, they'd just market the free stuff. That was a long time ago, and it did not work out that way.
A few days ago I asked Manton Reece if he could add a feature that gave me a feed of replies to me on his service, micro.blog.
The feed is there now, I'm subscribed and new comments are posted in the feed and Murphy-willing I will see them. Bing!
It's a killer feature for sure. But the best part of it is this -- here are two developers working together. This is how the web works when it's working.
BTW a suggestion. Right now the title on my feed is:
That's a problem in the limited horizontal space in the blogroll. A more useful title would be:
BTW, if you were building a social network out of RSS this would be an essential feature. It also validates Manton's intuition to allow people like me to be absentee publishers to his community. But the missing piece was allowing the conversation to be two-way, which it now is. That deserves another bing!
In Drummer, when I get too many tabs open from things I haven't looked at in a while, this is what I do.
Bullet items for the Fediforum conference in March.
BTW, this can be read on my blog, on Mastodon, in WordPress and of course my feeds (and thus can be read in any app that supports inbound RSS).
Braintrust query. Every once in a while I get reports from people who looked something up on my blog's Daytona search engine saying that where they expected dates they see things like this: NaN. The reason you see that is that the archive has a mistake in it, where there was supposed to be a date there was something else. Usually I shrug it off, yes there are mistakes in the archive, 30+ years of OPML files, it's a miracle there aren't more errors. Then I realized since all this stuff is on GitHub, people could help with this, by instead of sending me the report, post a note on GitHub, here -- saying you searched for this term and this is what I saw. Provide the term and a screen shot of what you saw. And then other people who have some extra time, could look through the archive, find the post, and then show me what needs to be fixed. I would then fix it, and over time the archive would get fixed. I posted a note here on the Scripting News repo, if you want to help, bookmark that link, and when you see an error, post the note and we can get going.

I always objected to browsers trying to hide the feeds. I come from NYC and rode the subway to school every day in high school. The things you see! It's all out there for the looking and breathing. Lift the hood on a car. Look at all those wires and hoses, what do they do. I hope they don't kill me. Whoever made the decision at Microsoft or Firefox or wherever that feeds needed to be obfuscated, some advice -- be more respectful of your users. The web is the medium that had a View Source command. You're supposed to take a look. Don't forget the Back button if you don't like what you see. Something funny, if only life had a Back button.