You want to see him address being "a stinky manager", having "beginner energy", choosing to take VC as opposed to "a solid living via crowdfunding", or "already writing slop well before he had access to LLMs"?

Those are all opinions where arguing about them isn't going to be productive.

Countering the accusation of "an outright fabrication" on the other hand is worthwhile because it's a claim that can be countered.

If somebody called me a liar for something that demonstrably wasn't a lie I wouldn't let that stand, either.

▲

nicce 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

> Countering the accusation of "an outright fabrication" on the other hand is worthwhile because it's a claim that can be countered.

Hmm, fuzzing integration was merged 8 months ago. First found bug mentioned 3 months ago. Bun is 4 years old. I think both arguments can be true at the same time based on this evidence. It is entirely possible that for more than 3 years team has said that no fuzzing was done, and the first fuzzing was done just 3 months ago, and this information did not travel.

▲

simonw 3 days ago | parent [-]

If you're going to accuse someone of "an outright fabrication" it's on you to check that you're not wrong before you say that.

▲

nicce 3 days ago | parent [-]

I agree that ""an outright fabrication" is a bit too much.

But also the claims about the fuzzing in the original blog post are kinda too misleading. Fuzzing harness is basically just coverage-guided random bytes towards Bun's JS APIs and it will not really catch anything in depth from the code. Just the most obvious from the surface. And 24/7 fuzzing is introduced likely around the same time when Rust rewrite seemed to be main focus, as then the first issues were created. Current fuzzing does not give much trust about the code stability, but indeed the fuzzing has been started and likely improves in the future if someone puts some work for the harness.

▲

alistaiir 3 days ago | parent [-]

> And 24/7 fuzzing is introduced likely around the same time when Rust rewrite seemed to be main focus,

This is false, it was done many months before (Nov 20 2025). There is some irony in your comment being in reply to a thread about verifying claims before posting them...

	▲	nicce 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		> This is false, it was done many months before (Nov 20 2025). There is some irony in your comment being in reply to a thread about verifying claims before posting them... There is no evidence for this. It is integration PR to support fuzzing with one tool. The public repository does not have CI pipeline for it. Fuzzing is done privately somewhere, and the first linked issues are around April.

▲

embedding-shape 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[flagged]

▲

Mawr 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Those statements are all consistent with the publicly observable facts like this whole thing going from "I'm experimenting with this" to "this is merged into main now, yolo" within a week or so. The complaints from Jarred on the amount of bugs they've been having is too.

It all checks out.