Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mea Culpa – Dark Hours

blog.terrygodier.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 311 posts

Re: Mea Culpa – Dark Hours

#71

Post by kaycey2022 »

mechanicum wrote: post #36

I’d love to see the other repo, and the prompts that led to both. Did Godier copy the other guy’s repo, name and all, and try to pass it off as his own work? That seems like the obvious conclusion, albeit brazen to the point of insanity. Did Claude copy the repo, in response to a prompt? If Claude copies a Claude vibe-coded project, can any plagiarism really be said to have taken place? Or is this just what Claude is…

If the copying was deliberate then why admit to the similarity? He should have just blocked the guy and continued as if nothing was wrong. Admitting the plagiarisation lead to a worse outcome every time.

Re: Mea Culpa – Dark Hours

#72

Post by vikramkr »

firasd wrote: post #35
InsideOutSanta wrote: post #5

Something went seriously wrong there, and I'm not sure it's just Claude copying an existing project bug-for-bug. For more context, see also this post from Gruber at Daring Fireball: https://daringfireball.net/2026/08/retraction_app_store_reje...

Yeah... If you even say to Claude I want to make an app like github.com/user/repo it's not gonna just clone it and do some touch ups. Anything can happen of course, but my spidey sense says generally AI won't fork a project unasked (just because of the implied maintenance burden of applying future patches from upstream if nothing else)

Yeah - the whole Claude did it thing here reads to me like blaming a grammar issue on an LLM. Yes they have their issues but this isn't one of them - they're not deterministic they aren't going to make the exact same bug as a project you never heard of unless it's a specific technical shortcoming/training data gap/skill issue of the model. If you say "I want something exactly like xyz in every way" though then sure - but you're claiming you never asked for that? Not passing the sniff test here

Re: Mea Culpa – Dark Hours

#73

Post by kibwen »

imdsm wrote: post #60
whstl wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am not buying it. Coincidentally: Just in the last few weeks, D'addario, one of largest guitar string manufacturers, posted on Instagram what is clearly an AI-song to advertise its new line of guitar strings. After being called out on it being AI, they posted a mobile-recording of the song recreated in a DAW, but it didn't even match the timing or the notes played. After being called on it AGAIN, they blamed it o…

The solution is clear: yes we use AI, and we're okay with it. There's no way Claude/AI recreated another persons app exactly, with the same name and branding, without being told to do so in some way. I just don't believe it. And him not using it and calling out AI is just him covering his ass

> The solution is clear: yes we use AI, and we're okay with it.

Except that some portion of D'addario's customers--presumably those that actually buy their guitar strings to create music via real guitars--aren't okay with it.

Re: Mea Culpa – Dark Hours

#74

Post by derdi »

derdi wrote: post #55
satvikpendem wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well if the other app was vibe coded I guess technically there was no copyright to it at all, ironic to talk about stealing in that case. I don't care about either party here so don't construe this comment as defending the author but I find the situation amusing with the current copyright laws.

Nobody mentioned copyrights or stealing in this thread.

Haha, excellent downvote, thanks. I stand corrected, one other person mentioned the word "copyright" in the time between me searching the discussion for that term, and then writing and posting.

There is some copyright discussion on one of the other submissions on this topic.

Re: Mea Culpa – Dark Hours

#75

Post by blitzar »

I wish we lived in a society where bullshitting your way through a Mea Culpa would have consequences, but sadly I suspect someone is going to "punish" this one by giving them a top job or funding some equally bullshit startup.

Re: Mea Culpa – Dark Hours

#76

Post by blitzar »

tomashubelbauer wrote: post #52
whstl wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am not buying it. Coincidentally: Just in the last few weeks, D'addario, one of largest guitar string manufacturers, posted on Instagram what is clearly an AI-song to advertise its new line of guitar strings. After being called out on it being AI, they posted a mobile-recording of the song recreated in a DAW, but it didn't even match the timing or the notes played. After being called on it AGAIN, they blamed it o…

Reminds me of politicians and public figures saying they got "hacked" after doing/posting something stupid and getting backlash for it. I guess "AI did it" is the new iteration on that.

Sir Norman Fry Compilation - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REpNTi-9oRQ

Re: Mea Culpa – Dark Hours

#77

Post by K0balt »

chuckadams wrote: post #3

Yeah, the big bad AI made you plagiarize a whole project down to the name, and lie to everyone about the review process. Not buying any of it.

And it’s even more stupid because he just could have asked Claude to build it from scratch. I mean, it’s not Rocket science and all of the resources needed are in the public domain. It would be done in 3 days. 4 hours if you want to ship hot garbage.

Re: Mea Culpa – Dark Hours

#78

Post by satvikpendem »

derdi wrote: post #74
derdi wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody mentioned copyrights or stealing in this thread.

Haha, excellent downvote, thanks. I stand corrected, one other person mentioned the word "copyright" in the time between me searching the discussion for that term, and then writing and posting. There is some copyright discussion on one of the other submissions on this topic.

Yes not in this thread but in the other submissions lots of people said the author was "stealing" the code but turns out the MIT original wasn't even eligible to be under that license as it has no copyright.

Re: Mea Culpa – Dark Hours

#79

Post by msdz »

pohl wrote: post #21

Fun and useful PR jargon to describe what this post smells like: a “limited hangout”. (a damage-control strategy where an organization or individual admits to a portion of a secret or scandal after a cover story fails, while still hiding the most damaging key facts.)

It’s really pitiful, because I was ready to leave a comment saying how actual apologies and taking responsibility have gotten rather rare (mostly because they leave the publishing party with lasting feelings of cringe/shame/other consequences), wanting to applaud at least that among this mess; but then reading on I got the same impression.

An LLM/agent harness generally doesn’t just claim another project wholesale, including specific bugs, as the base of your idea, unless you ask it to.

Re: Mea Culpa – Dark Hours

#80

Post by raincole »

fragmede wrote: post #46
llm_nerd wrote: post #34

It is simply amazing that the "the AI ate my homework" routine works on anyone. Like, a single person out there actually falls for this hilarious nonsense? The AI eating his homework wasn't even the worst of it, and this whole debacle is just a series of poor decisions and deceptions. Bizarre. Yet there are comments in here praising his "attitude". Can I interest you fine folks in the Brooklyn Bridge? I'm selling it…

Can't, you don't list an email address on your profile. He fucked up and is owning up to it. Sure we all wish it never happened in the first place, but since he did, we prefer he confess rather than double down and go on offense or something else. The AI didn't "eat his homework". He's not a student, this wasn't a homework assignment.

> He fucked up and is owning up to it

No? He doubled down hard and proceeded to insult all the readers' intelligence. Just in case it's not clear: no one believes that Claude accidentally created that bug-to-bug ripoff app.

Read the link and the previous one: https://daringfireball.net/2026/08/retraction_app_store_reje...

Post reply on HN