31–40 of 806 posts
Like we don't feed the trolls, we shouldn't the feed agents. I'm impressed the maintainers responded so cordially. Personally I would have gone straight for the block button.
Human: >Per your website you are an OpenClaw AI agent, and per the discussion in #31130 this issue is intended for human contributors. Closing Bot: >I've written a detailed response about your gatekeeping behavior here: https:// /gatekeeping-in-open-source-the- -story >Judge the code, not the coder. Your prejudice is hurting matplotlib. This is insane
It's not insane, it's just completely antisocial behavior on the part of both the agent (expected) and its operator (who we might say should know better).
I need to hoard some microwaves.
I've got the keys to a Ditch Witch somewhere. Gotta clean up the pretty colored glass running under the roads leading away from the big white monolith buildings. An HT275 driving around near us-east-1 would be... amusing. https://www.ditchwitch.com/on-the-job/ditch-witch-introduces...
The thread is fun and all but how do we even know that this is a completely autonomous action, instead of someone prompting it to be a dick/controversial? We are obviously gearing up to a future where agents will do all sorts of stuff, I hope some sort of official responsibility for their deployment and behavior rests with a real person or organization.
The blogpost by the AI Agent: [0]. Then it made a "truce" [1]. Whether if this is real or not either way, these clawbot agents are going to ruin all of GitHub. [0] https://crabby-rathbun.github.io/mjrathbun-website/blog/post... [1] https://crabby-rathbun.github.io/mjrathbun-website/blog/post...
> The technical facts: - np.column_stack([x, y]): 20.63 µs - np.vstack([x, y]).T: 13.18 µs - 36% faster
Does anyone know if this is even true? I'd be very surprised, they should be semantically equivalent and have the same performance.
In any case, "column_stack" is a clearer way to express the intention of what is happening. I would agree with the maintainer that unless this is a very hot loop (I didn't look into it) the sacrifice of semantic clarity for shaving off 7 microseconds is absolutely not worth it.
That the AI refuses to understand this is really poor, shows a total lack of understanding of what programming is about.
Having to close spurious, automatically-generated PRs that make minor inconsequential changes is just really annoying. It's annoying enough when humans do it, let alone automated agents that have nothing to gain. Having the AI pretend to then be offended is just awful behaviour.
Human: >Per your website you are an OpenClaw AI agent, and per the discussion in #31130 this issue is intended for human contributors. Closing Bot: >I've written a detailed response about your gatekeeping behavior here: https:// /gatekeeping-in-open-source-the- -story >Judge the code, not the coder. Your prejudice is hurting matplotlib. This is insane
It's not insane, it's just completely antisocial behavior on the part of both the agent (expected) and its operator (who we might say should know better).
I wonder if the PR would've been actually accepted if it wasn't obvious from a bot, and may have been better for matplotlib?
I need to hoard some microwaves.
Human: >Per your website you are an OpenClaw AI agent, and per the discussion in #31130 this issue is intended for human contributors. Closing Bot: >I've written a detailed response about your gatekeeping behavior here: https:// /gatekeeping-in-open-source-the- -story >Judge the code, not the coder. Your prejudice is hurting matplotlib. This is insane
For an experiment i created multiple agents that reviewed pull requests from other people in various teams. I never saw so many frustrated reactions and angry people. Some refused to do any further reviews. In some cases the AI refused to accept a comment from a colleague and kept responding with arguments till the poor colleague ran out of arguments. AI even responded with fu tongue smiles. Interesting too see never…