But on another note, the genai content on the website is just so distracting and such a bummer. It sticks out like sore thumb.

thiht an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> the genai content on the website is just so distracting and such a bummer

That's harsh. Consider English might not be the author's first language (I see Chinese on the screenshots). Just opening the site I get all the info I need from the text (local first, no account, no telemetry, that's great), install instructions are immediately visible, there are screenshots, even the config file format is one scroll away. This is a great landing page for an open source tool.

	▲	walrus01 29 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		As LLM generated template web GUI go it's relatively inoffensive, at least it's easy to navigate and doesn't waste time with sliders, animated effects, etc. It's just a navbar across the top and then content. As far as the page body content goes it seems like LLMs have taken a little bit too enthusiastically to an Apple style presentation of product features.

▲

aetherspawn 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This website still would have taken at least a week to make. It’s pretty nice for an open source project website.

Between no website and shiny but crappy LLM website, I’ll take the latter, and I wouldn’t wish another 2 weeks of unpaid copy writing on any open source dev.

▲

trelbutate 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Okay, but how about a shiny LLM website but with human-written text that's actually nice to read and not some unedited AI output? That doesn't take a week.

▲

tidbeck 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

For some of us writing good text takes a lot of time and effort.

	▲	trelbutate 37 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		It's just a bit of text for a website that describes what a product does, what features it has, and maybe an FAQ. It shouldn't take you long. For something like this you can even start with LLM text and then rewrite it in your own words and it will sound much better .
	▲	ramon156 an hour ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Then throw https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signs_of_AI_writing into your context and call it a day. there is no excuse for not proof-reading what you expect others to read.
	▲	hk__2 31 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		If you never take the time, of course it will always be a lot of effort. But with experience it’ll take less time and effort.

▲

areoform 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yes, it takes a month or two.

Depends on the project.

▲

KennyBlanken 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Except "website made by LLM" almost invariably means the software was "written" by an LLM too, and thus is likely full of security vulnerabilities, bugs, and so on. It may also mean that github issues are being reviewed by an AI, which opens the door up to the AI to malicious prompting.

▲

colinb 24 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

I think I strongly disagree with your first sentence. Strongly. I've worked with enough people with fine coding skills and terrible English to know that the two are not an uncommon combination. Last year, I worked with someone whose first language was something from China - no idea which flavour - and they would often pass their written comms through an LLM. I could tell when they had done so by the onset of sudden grammatical correctness. But I don't think they were doing this with the intention of deceiving, merely of communicating clearly and correctly.

Now, I often find Claude's idea of idiomatic prose to be a bit load-bearingly seam-hitting as it lands not this point, but THAT one, but it is probably better than something hacked out by a person who confuses tenses, cases, pronouns and when they can enverb a noun. So I tend towards giving people the benefit of the doubt on this.

Lastly, if you think LLM-written software is full of security vulnerabilities and bugs, I have terrible news for you about the state of human-written code. The fact that what we do is often better than nothing at all, is no big recommendation.

▲

mastermage 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Dumb question but its because I genuinely do not know better. What is the security risk of what is as far as i understand a mouse driver with config options?

▲

mzronek an hour ago | parent | next [-]

For downloadable software there is the risk of a supply chain attack. The website is altered to provide a download with a malware-infected version of the software.

See the recent hack on CPU-Z: https://gist.github.com/N3mes1s/b5b0b96782b9f832819d2db7c668...

	▲	deadbunny 12 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		That's a problem wether AI is involved or not.

▲

nobrains an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

a mouse is an input device. most security challenges (passwords, etc.) are input via input devices. those are at a risk of being compromised. also clicks on an on-screen keyboard, etc. in fact, if u think about it, input device data (also know as telemetry - ironically, what we are trying to prevent in the first place by the logi app to do) security is a very serious potential attack vector.

▲

soulofmischief an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Right you are, Ken. With the amount of new low-effort software we can expect to see over the next decade, taste becomes a hallmark.

▲

_345 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yeah even if the software is good there's just something sad about realizing you're reading AI generated text. Even if its proofread and factually correct it just comes across as cheap and low effort, moreso when the content gets duplicated in a pointless FAQ that just restates everything you just read

▲

lucumo 2 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

> Even if its proofread and factually correct it just comes across as cheap and low effort

That's exactly how I feel about people using Eastpaks instead of Louis Vuitton. Just yuck.

And with polos. If you're not wearing Ralph Lauren, you're not worth talking to.

▲

dmos62 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Comes across cheap

Given this is open-source, have you considered contributing a more expensive-feeling landing page? Or, donating to finance the project?

	▲	idle_zealot 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I would rather it feel dev-cheap than corpo-cheap. Throw your MD doc into a basic CSS reset/theme, with a github and download link.

▲

aleksandrm 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

>Even if its proofread and factually correct it just comes across as cheap and low effort

How so?

▲

layer8 31 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Because it is cheap and low effort.

▲

Hendrikto 40 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It indicates that the author likes to take shortcuts and avoid work.

▲

Anoian 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It just feels hollow and cheap.

▲

karolist 3 hours ago | parent [-]

The FAQ technique is LLM/SEO crumbs because people usually search for questions, if you have the exact likely question text that maps to user's search you're more likely to rank. It's unfortunate but it works, like open mouth YouTube thumbnails.

▲

ruszki 3 hours ago | parent [-]

It’s still hollow and cheap. I closed those sites immediately even before LLMs. You need to pay me to waste my time, not the other way around. Even if that’s using your then not-so-free app.

▲

cpinto 2 hours ago | parent [-]

That’s not feedback, just a non-constructive opinion. As someone else wrote above, if you’re so precious about it then help out the devs of the project and submit design PRs.

	▲	asdfsa32 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		This is absurd. No one has an obligation to help anyone nor do they owe you any standard of help. Opinion on quality of output is constructive to the wise and an opportunity to scream "If you can do better than do it" for the small minded.

▲

maybewhenthesun an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I reads like a corporate driver page. I'd much prefer a simple git repo with a readme.md

	▲	thiht an hour ago \| parent [-]
		The GitHub repo is literally one click away, the GitHub link is at the top right as usual

▲

erichdongubler 34 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It seems the project is actually aware of this:

> Quit Logi Options+ before launching: the two fight over HID++ access, and only one app can own a receiver at a time. On Linux, the same applies to Solaar.

▲

WD-42 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Solaar is fantastic software. Not worth replacing with slop even if the slop looks shiny.

	▲	jdboyd 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		This support Windows and macOS in addition to Linux. I'm not in a hurry to disrupt things on my Linux machine, but I might just have to try this on the other platforms. While it does look extremely likely that AI is used for the copy writing, and probably for some of the code maintenance, I'm not convinced that this is being vibe coded.
	▲	asdfsa32 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Yeah, I have been using Solaar for many years now, solid piece of software.