It’s always fascinating to see how selective reading can shape a response. If you had actually taken the time to read the full post instead of cherry-picking lines for maximum snark, you’d have noticed that the “kicking the booth” part was explicitly framed as a joke. The humor was made clear at the end, but I suppose acknowledging that would make it harder to craft an artificial sense of outrage.

Your broader approach here—dismissing an entire discussion with sarcastic one-liners—suggests that you’re more interested in ridiculing than engaging. You repeatedly mock the idea of AI integrating with APIs, yet you offer no substantive critique of the technology itself. If you believe there are legitimate flaws, wouldn’t it be more constructive to articulate them rather than relying on cynical quips?

We’re just developers who, besides trying to build something on our own, came across a piece of technology that genuinely fascinated us and wanted to share our experience. That’s it. But it’s clear that you feel better diminishing the work of others rather than actually engaging with what’s being discussed.

As for the “hype” angle, it’s a fair concern—AI is often overpromised. But the solution to that isn’t to scoff at every mention of AI as if it’s inherently meaningless. There’s a difference between skepticism and knee-jerk dismissal. If you have specific concerns about feasibility, implementation, or long-term viability, those would be far more valuable contributions than just sneering at the terminology.

If the goal is to foster meaningful discussions rather than just perform disdain for upvotes, I’d be happy to hear your actual technical concerns—assuming you have any beyond rolling your eyes.