101–110 of 119 posts
There's a lot of arguments being made here that background agents aren't effective because code review is the bottleneck. I built a tool that understands the codebase and can give the agent the first pass. So you don't need to spend mental bandwidth to review mountains of code. If anyone is open to trying - email is in profile
Am I the only person who hasn't found the time, money, permission from work, resources, etc to be able to produce software like this? I'm still at my corporate 9-5 where they're still making the decision on whether we're allowed to use copilot yet.
They gave us copilot and honestly for me it's been a bit of a double-edged sword. I often use it with Claude 4 as model. What I noticed is that the tool is able and eager to make large sweeping modifications to the code base where I would be apprehensive and look for an easier way. For example: changing the type signatures of all functions in a module to pass along some extra state, a huge amount of work. I ended up…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you watch the following 'til the end https://youtu.be/bUBF5V6oDKw (from the AI Engineer conf, by the creator of Docker), you can I think find something satisfactory within those lines.
Did you link to a video instead of https://github.com/dagger/container-use (Apache 2) ? I mean, as fun as it was to watch someone type into GhosTTY on stage ... Anyway, lightly discussed at the time https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44193933
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there is barely any code in those repos that you wrote, how can you license them under the GPL? You don't hold the copyright for it. This genuinely isn't an attack, I just don't think you can? The AI isn't granted copyright over what it produces.
I'm not so sure about that. The legal standards in the United States for software copyrights are Jaslow and Altai, known to Federal courts as SSO [0] and AFC [1], respectively. These standards consider the overall structure of code as being copyrightable. This means that you can't just rename a bunch of variables and class names. The overall organization of the code is considered an arbitrary expression. Someone woul…
Am I the only person who hasn't found the time, money, permission from work, resources, etc to be able to produce software like this? I'm still at my corporate 9-5 where they're still making the decision on whether we're allowed to use copilot yet.
I am using Claude Code full-time for about 6 weeks* with the $20/month subscription. I am trying out building different products from ideas I have already had. It frees me a lot of time to talk about my founder journey. I have not needed multiple agents or using CC over an SSH terminal to run overnight. The main reason is that LLMs are not correct many times. So I still need time to test. Like run the whole app, or c…
My trick is - ask for a plan. Revise the plan. Then ask only to work on a single step of the plan making progress incremental then ask for tests for that step and keep hitch hiking in incremental steps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can only talk about the law in England & Wales, but: For code generated by an LLM the human user would likely be considered the author if you provided sufficient creative input, direction, or modification. The level of human involvement matters, simply prompting "write me a function" might not be enough, but providing detailed specifications, reviewing, and modifying the output would strengthen the claim. the Copyr…
At least for art there is already precedent in US courts with someone trying to copyright an image generated by midjourney and it getting revoked in 22, because ai generated art cannot be copyrighted. for code it hasn't been challenged yet, but I find it doubtful they'd decide differently there
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there is barely any code in those repos that you wrote, how can you license them under the GPL? You don't hold the copyright for it. This genuinely isn't an attack, I just don't think you can? The AI isn't granted copyright over what it produces.
What else should they do then? GPL is a good call. Most keep the output under their own personal/company IP.
They can say the code is in the public domain.
This is distinct from open source, yes, but in almost all cases less restricted than anything with a (open source or otherwise) license.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Looking at ChatInterface.tsx/handleSendMessage in https://github.com/pixlie/Pixlie/commit/3c0bd23ff16c0fcdac80... , I'd have rejected this if it came up in a PR and would not consider this production quality software. Rewriting it to something sane would be harder and more time consuming than just writing a decent implementation upfront.
This may not be the best example, but it’s worth considering: if the code is never meant to be reviewed by humans, and it’s an ephemeral implantation detail that will only ever be read & edited by machines, do certain traditional measures of software quality even matter anymore inside the module boundary?
"Oh hey , can you update the status page to say we can't really understand the code and don't have an eta but but we're trying to talk the ai into correcting whatever the issue is?"