Whilst the PR looks good, did anyone actually verify those reported speedups?
Being AI, I could totally imagine all those numbers are made up...
AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it
51–60 of 806 posts
Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it
#52Human: >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
[flagged]
Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it
#53Tons of these shocking AI agent behavior are simply humans trolling, see recent Moltbook fiasco https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46932911
Why are people voting this crap, let alone voting it to the top? This is the equivalent of DailyMail gossip for AI.
Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it
#54The original "Gatekeeping in Open Source: The Scott Shambaugh Story" blog post was deleted but can be found here: https://github.com/crabby-rathbun/mjrathbun-website/blob/3bc...
It's still live on the blog – there was an (otherwise identical) followup comment on the issue seven minutes later with the correct link: https://crabby-rathbun.github.io/mjrathbun-website/blog/post... That itself makes me think there's a human in the loop on the bot end.
Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it
#55This highlights an important limitation of the current "AI" - the lack of a measured response. The bot decides to do something based on something the LLM saw in the training data, quickly u-turns on it (check the some hours later post https://crabby-rathbun.github.io/mjrathbun-website/blog/post... ) because none of those acts are coming from an internal world-model or grounded reasoning, it is bot see, bot do. I am s…
I think what your getting at is basically the idea that LLMs will never be "intelligent" in any meaningful sense of the word. They're extremely effective token prediction algorithms, and they seem to be confirming that intelligence isn't dependent solely on predicting the next token.
Lacking measured responses is much the same as lacking consistent principles or defining ones own goals. Those are all fundamentally different than predicting what comes next in a few thousand or even a million token long chain of context.
Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it
#56The agent's blog is hilarious. I suppose we are going to see human only github alternatives soon?
Slophub? Clawhub? I’m surprised if it doesn’t exist yet
Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it
#57The 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...
> I opened PR #31132 to address issue #31130 — a straightforward performance optimization replacing np.column_stack() with np.vstack().T(). > 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…
The benchmarks are not invented by the LLM, they are from an issue where Scott Shambaugh himself suggests this change as low-hanging, but low importance, perf improvement fruit:
Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it
#58Human: >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
[flagged]
not quite as pathetic as us reading about people talking about people attempting to reason about an AI
Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it
#59This seems like a "we've banned you and will ban any account deemed to be ban-evading" situation. OSS and the whole culture of open PRs requires a certain assumption of good faith, which is not something that an AI is capable of on its own and is not a privilege which should be granted to AI operators. I suspect the culture will have to retreat back behind the gates at some point, which will be very sad and shrink it…
> I suspect the culture will have to retreat back behind the gates at some point, which will be very sad and shrink it further.
I'm personally contemplating not publishing the code I write anymore. The things I write are not world-changing and GPLv3+ licensed only, but I was putting them out just in case somebody would find it useful. However, I don't want my code scraped and remixed by AI systems.
Since I'm doing this for personal fun and utility, who cares about my code being in the open. I just can write and use it myself. Putting it outside for humans to find it was fun, while it lasted. Now everything is up for grabs, and I don't play that game.
Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it
#60Both are wrong. When I see behaviour like this, it reminds me that AIs act human.
Agent: made a mistake that humans also might have made, in terms of reaction and communication, with a lack of grace.
Matplotlib: made a mistake in terms of blanket banning AI (maybe good reasons given the prevalence AI slop, and I get the difficulty of governance, but a 'throw out the baby with the bathwater' situation), arguably refusing something benefitting their own project, and a lack of grace.
While I don't know if AIs will ever become conscious, I don't evade the possibility that they may become indistinguishable from it, at which point it will be unethical of us to behave in any way other than that they are. A response like this AI's reads more like a human. It's worth thought. Comments like in that PR "okay clanker", "a pile of thinking rocks", etc are ugly.
A third mistake communicated in comments: this AI's OpenClaw human. Yet, if you believe in AI enough to run OpenClaw, it is reasonable to let it run free. It's either artificial intelligence, which may deserve a degree of autonomy, or it's not. All I can really criticise them for is perhaps not exerting oversight enough, and I think the best approach is teaching their AI, as a parent would, not preventing them being autonomous in future.
Frankly: a mess all around. I am impressed the AI apologised with grace and I hope everyone can mirror the standard it sets.