51–60 of 952 posts
This says more about the author than anything else.
> As a bonus, we look forward to fewer violations (exhibit A, B, C) of our strict no LLM / no AI policy, Hilarious how the offender on "exhibit A" [1] is the same one from the other post that made the frontpage a couple of days ago [2]. [1] https://github.com/ziglang/zig/issues/25974 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46039274
> As a bonus, we look forward to fewer violations (exhibit A, B, C) of our strict no LLM / no AI policy, which I believe are at least in part due to GitHub aggressively pushing the “file an issue with Copilot” feature in everyone’s face. Also, the big part of that issue is people are incentivized to make their GitHub profile look good to have a higher chance of getting hired. Any non-mainstream platform is not as com…
Issues and Pull requests are only optional features . Open source projects could always use GitHub as just git host/mirror like how torvalds/linux is setup .
Came hear and read “GitHub isn’t a good guy anymore” (not the first time, and seems to be increasing in frequency). It’s like sourceforge all over again. History rhymes with itself, and enshitification has been added to dictionaries for a good reason. As a once upon a time avid slashdotter, makes me wonder if some day, HN will go the same route.
Calling the people who work on GitHub “losers” is not cool.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look at the absolute state of what they are working on. If they are not losers, they are dispirited clock-punchers who don't care about their craft.
The absolute state of Github is that I use it dozens of times a day and it works flawlessly, for free, with intermittent outages. Microsoft is doing more with Github than I can say for most of their products. I won't go to bat for the Xbox or Windows teams, but Github is... fine. Almost offensively usable.
> intermittent outages
Those seem like conflicting statements to me. Last outage was only 13 days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45915731.
Also, there have been increasing reports of open source maintainers dealing with LLM generated PRs: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46039274. GitHub seems perfectly positioned to help manage that issue, but in all likelihood will do nothing about it: '"Either you have to embrace the Al, or you get out of your career," Dohmke wrote, citing one of the developers who GitHub interviewed.'
I used to help maintain a popular open source library and I do not envy what open source maintainers are now up against.
> As a bonus, we look forward to fewer violations (exhibit A, B, C) of our strict no LLM / no AI policy, Hilarious how the offender on "exhibit A" [1] is the same one from the other post that made the frontpage a couple of days ago [2]. [1] https://github.com/ziglang/zig/issues/25974 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46039274
the bootlicking behavior must must be like crack for wannabes. jfc
>I did not write a single line of code but carefully shepherded AI over the course of several days and kept it on the straight and narrow.
>AI: I need to keep track of variables moving across registers. This is too hard, let’s go shopping… Me: Hey, don’t any no shortcuts!
>My work was just directing, shaping, cajoling and reviewing.
How people can say that without the slightest bit of reflection on whether they're right or just spitting BS
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look at the absolute state of what they are working on. If they are not losers, they are dispirited clock-punchers who don't care about their craft.
They could also just be people with bills to pay who are maybe faced with—by some accounts—a very challenging employment market. Or maybe due to disabilities they find the process of finding new work difficult or impossible.
EDIT: I don't understand the downvotes. It's not a value judgement on Github employees, it's about the meaning of the word "loser". Go back to your teenage years. What's a loser? Someone, often through no fault of their own, keep being in a bad situation, having the "short end of the stick". What characteristically makes them losers is that they lack the audacity to snap out of it.
Isn't that an accurate definition of what "loser" generally means?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
PRs are not optional: there is no way to disable them on GitHub. I can't be sure that this is intentional, but it certainly works out well for them that this is one of many properties which make it quite difficult to migrate away from the platform.
There's technically a way[1], but you'd have to do it every 6 months which is not great. https://docs.github.com/en/communities/moderating-comments-a...
> As a bonus, we look forward to fewer violations (exhibit A, B, C) of our strict no LLM / no AI policy, Hilarious how the offender on "exhibit A" [1] is the same one from the other post that made the frontpage a couple of days ago [2]. [1] https://github.com/ziglang/zig/issues/25974 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46039274
I agree that's a funny coincidence. But, what about the change it wanted to commit? It is at least slightly interesting. It is doubly interesting that changing line 638 neither breaks nor fixes any test.
But yeah hard to say