Post #2246196
2026-05-07 05:56 UTC
@jyasskin@hachyderm.io @slightlyoff@toot.cafe the I2S points to https://github.com/webmachinelearning/prompt-api/blob/main/README.md#stakeholder-feedback for evidence which includes "developer surveys", which is a link to a survey that appears to have asked if developers would be happy with this as an "extension API". So yeah, there's something a little fishy going on.
"Misrepresentation" is one of the things disallowed in Google's ToU for the Prompt API. I guess, therefore, summarising the I2S with the Prompt API would be breaking the rules.
Replies (1)
-
@slightlyoff@toot.cafe 2026-05-07 06:52
@jaffathecake@mastodon.social @jyasskin@hachyderm.io Sorry for slow reply. I don't credit much of the developer feedback I've seen, so to your first question, I think a tentative "maybe." That's part of what I'm arguing in the blink-dev thread, and why I think this needs, at a minimum, to go back to OT and bake. That is, hold Blink participants to the Blink Launch Process, rather than decry a vendor leading when others aren't offering alternatives. I.e., value responsibility and honesty.