1. Suspicion that the article/post was AI‑generated
Many commenters questioned whether the piece was written by a human or an LLM, pointing to its style or perceived lack of coherence.
- “Tell me you use an LLM to write everything without telling me…” – EGreg
- “The content was clearly AI written. It made no sense.” – shevy‑java
- “I’m beginning to think that this sort of behavior is actually an inverted counter‑signal…” – tolerance
2. Why Xanadu never succeeded / is impractical
Several users highlighted the fundamental flaws that prevented Xanadu from gaining traction, such as unnecessary complexity, lack of real‑world demand, and technical shortcomings.
- “The fundamental problem was that tracking and paying for text ownership and viewing down to the word level isn't really very useful.” – Animats
- “It continues to not be a thing because… it's solving a problem nobody has.” – Analemma_
- “They had no idea how to deal with either images or distributed systems.” – Animats
3. Modern tools (AI agents, LLMs, static‑site generators, Git) could revive hypertext ideas
A number of commenters saw promise in combining today’s technologies with Xanadu‑style concepts—using AI to aid static site creation, agents for hyperlinks, or Git‑based versioning.
- “We remove WordPress, database, configuration… AI helps with making a static page version of our site…” – e12e
- “I think I agree that agents might be a new tool that might facilitate some hypertext ideas.” – e12e
- “A single paragraph could have thousands… unless you keep the docuverse limited in scope…” – ThinkBeat (discussing the challenges but still framing the discussion around agent‑based hypertext)