Live data from Hacker News

90% of Claude-linked output going to GitHub repos w <2 stars

claudescode.dev

51–60 of 252 posts

Re: 90% of Claude-linked output going to GitHub repos w <2 stars

#51

Perfect example of a base rate fallacy - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_rate_fallacy What percentage of GitHub activity goes to GitHub repos with less than 2 stars? I would guess it's close to the same number.

My reaction as well -- I have a few dozen public repos of 100% human-written code, most are 0 stars!

I have a few dozen org repos, of course none of them have stars, who stars their corporate repos?

Re: 90% of Claude-linked output going to GitHub repos w <2 stars

#54
post #18

Perfect example of a base rate fallacy - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_rate_fallacy What percentage of GitHub activity goes to GitHub repos with less than 2 stars? I would guess it's close to the same number.

The actual number is that 98% have less than 2 stars (0 or 1). About 90.25% has zero stars.

[flagged]

Re: 90% of Claude-linked output going to GitHub repos w <2 stars

#55
post #18

Perfect example of a base rate fallacy - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_rate_fallacy What percentage of GitHub activity goes to GitHub repos with less than 2 stars? I would guess it's close to the same number.

The actual number is that 98% have less than 2 stars (0 or 1). About 90.25% has zero stars.

I think this is useful in answering the grandparent comment's question:

stars : uniq(k)

1 : 14946505

10 : 1196622

100 : 213026

1000 : 28944

10000 : 1847

100000 : 20

Re: 90% of Claude-linked output going to GitHub repos w <2 stars

#56
Isn't that expected as well?

The idea with Claude writing code for most part is that everyone can write software that they need. Software for the audience of one. GitHub is just a place for them to live beyond my computer.

Why will I want to promote it or get stars?

Re: 90% of Claude-linked output going to GitHub repos w <2 stars

#59

Codeberg if you hate AI.

I wonder if there's a critical failure mode / safety feature of our species for some percentage of the population to always dislike whatever some other large percentage of the population likes.

As if it's to prevent the species from over-indexing on a particular set of behaviors.

Like how divisive films such as "Signs", "Cloud Atlas", and even "The Last Jedi" are loved by some and utterly reviled by others.

While that's kind of a silly case, maybe it's not just some random statistical fluke, but actually a function of the species at a population level to keep us from over-indexing and suboptimizing in some local minima or exploring some dangerous slope, etc.

Re: 90% of Claude-linked output going to GitHub repos w <2 stars

#60
post #31

Already enough comments about base rate fallacy, so instead I'll say I'm worried for the future of GitHub. Its business is underpinned by pre-AI assumptions about usage that, based on its recent instability, I suspect is being invalidated by surges in AI-produced code and commits. I'm worried, at some point, they'll be forced to take an unpopular stance and either restrict free usage tiers or restrict AI somehow. I'm…

In a (possibly near) future where most new code is generated by AI bots, the code itself becomes incidental/commodotized and it's nothing more than an intermediate representation (IR) of whatever solution it was prompt-engineered to produce. The value will come from the proposals, reviews, and specifications that caused that code to be produced.

Github is still code-centric with issues and discussions being auxilliary/supporting features around the code. At some point those will become the frontline features, and the code will become secondary.

Post reply on HN