I was just working on backing up my mac yesterday. I talked to Fable about replacing Carbon Copy Cloner with a custom script. One of the things I realized is t

I was just working on backing up my mac yesterday. I talked to Fable about replacing Carbon Copy Cloner with a custom script. One of the things I realized is that backups are about as “critical” a function as you can get in personal computing. I ultimately decided to stick with Carbon Copy Cloner because, in this case, it just made sense to use something battle-tested. I’m happy the developer of SuperDuper got the chance to build the version he wanted to build. But from the outside, reading the blog on mobile, it’s hard to ignore that the website is broken and appears to have been generated with an LLM. The fact that AI was used to create the website isn’t a problem in itself. It’s the lack of attention to detail in shipping the website broken. It makes me wonder about the state of the application itself. In the case of SuperDuper 4. The application could be extremely well tested. But as a potential customer, I have no way of knowing that, and the presentation doesn’t inspire the confidence I’d want before handing it my backups. Cases like this are where I really appreciate open source projects. Having the ability to look at the source directly gives me confidence. In this case, all I have to go off is a broken LLM generated website.