91–100 of 252 posts
It looks like my one-star repository [1] came close to making this person's leaderboard for number of commits (currently 5,524 since January, all by Claude Code). I'm not sure what that means, though. Only a small percentage of those commits are code. The vast majority are entries for a Japanese-English dictionary being written by Claude under my supervision. I'm using Github for this personal project because it turn…
It looks like my one-star repository [1] came close to making this person's leaderboard for number of commits (currently 5,524 since January, all by Claude Code). I'm not sure what that means, though. Only a small percentage of those commits are code. The vast majority are entries for a Japanese-English dictionary being written by Claude under my supervision. I'm using Github for this personal project because it turn…
One used Lenovo micro PC (size of a book) from eBay will serve you well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
Just to clarify as OP, the point here is not that Claude is not contributing to serious work, just that the dashboard suggests a lot of usage in public GitHub repos seems to be tied to low attention, high LOC repos. This is at least something to keep in mind when considering the composition of coding agent usage, and when assessing the sustainability of current trends. In hindsight the headline was a bit more sensati…
Agentic coding is not about creating software, it's about solving the problems we used to need software to solve directly.
The only reason I put my agentic code in a repo is so that I can version control changes. I don't have any intention of sharing that code with other people because it wouldn't be useful for them. If people want to solve a similar problem to me, they're much better of making their own solution.
I'm not at all surprised that most of Claude linked output is in low star repos. The only Claude repos I even bother sharing are those that are basically used as context-stores to help other people get up to speed faster with there of CC work.
The framing assumes github repos are supposed to be products.
I'm one of those zero star repos. I've been using Claude Code for some weeks now and built a personal knowledge graph with a reasoning engine, belief revision, link prediction. None of it is designed for stars, its designed for me. The repo exists because git is the right tool for versioning a system.. that evolves every day. The framing assumes github repos are supposed to be products.
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.
Yeah. Most of my public repos have 0 stars. Most of what I write sucks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does anyone actually know? So far I've just seen people guessing, and seeing that repeated.
I dont believe sudden influx of few million bots running 24/7 generating PRa and commits and invoking actions does not impact GitHub. It even sounds silly when you say it this way.
Shout out to Broadwayscore by thomaspryor@github At 2mo old - nearly a 1GB repo, 24M loc, 52K commits https://github.com/thomaspryor/Broadwayscore Polished site: https://broadwayscorecard.com/
Lol @ the proprietary license, you can just copy and use whatever Claude-committed code you want to from that repository.