Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

claudescode.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 252 posts

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

#121

Post by Joel_Mckay »

akoboldfrying wrote: post #109
Joel_Mckay wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would anyone settle for underpaid positions from an agency taking a 7% contract cut, and purging CVs from any external firm also contracting with their services. Most people figure out this scam very early in life, but some cling to terrible jobs for unfathomable reasons. =3

> Why would anyone settle for The answer to such questions is always that, given their circumstances, they have no realistic choice not to. This is very obvious, and it's frustrating to continually see people pretend otherwise.

> they have no realistic choice not to

If folks expect someone to solve problems for them, than 100% people end up unhappy. The old idea of loyalty buying a 30 year career with vertical movement died sometime in the 1990s.

Ikigai chart will help narrow down why people are unhappy:

https://stevelegler.com/2019/02/16/ikigai-a-four-circle-mode...

Even if folks are not thinking about doing a project, I still highly recommend this crash course in small business contracts

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVkLVRt6c1U

Rule #24: The lawyers Strategic Truth is to never lie, but also avoid voluntarily disclosing information that may help opponents.

Best of luck =3

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

#123

Post by dijksterhuis »

ZeWaka wrote: post #55
tlogan wrote: post #18

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

each line (mostly) being equal length provides me an odd comfort

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

#124

Post by heavyset_go »

fluidcruft wrote: post #100
heavyset_go wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lol @ the proprietary license, you can just copy and use whatever Claude-committed code you want to from that repository.

Can you? My understanding is that AI cannot claim copyright and my assumption would be that copyright law immediately extends authorship to the user operating the AI (or their employer).

AI output can't be copyrighted, copyright applies to human creations.

Substantive transformation of AI output via human creativity can be copyrighted, but if you're sticking to Claude commits, that's AI output.

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

#125

Post by tclancy »

sleepybrett wrote: post #51
levocardia wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

We need to have a talk about your pieces of flair.

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

#126

Post by albert_e »

jamesfinlayson wrote: post #88
zahrevsky wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Off topic, but it reminds me of another principle: every geographic heatmap is just a population map. https://xkcd.com/1138/

Yep, every time I see a heatmap of Australian lotto winners - very high correlation with Australia's population.

shouldn't a serious heatmap (or any comparative graph for that matter) normalize the stat being displayed versus the baseline population in that bucket?

in otherwords, plot the percentage or average metric and not the absolute metric.

e.g. number of lotto winners per thousand people living in that grid, percentage of starred repos as a percentage of all repos, per capita alcohol consumption, average screen-time etc.

Edit: unless ofcourse the point of the heatmap is to show the population distribution itself. In which case the metric would be number of people per square kilometer or some such.

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

#127

Post by roncesvalles »

madrox wrote: 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…

Text is cheap to store and not a lot of people in the world write code. Compare it, for example, to email or something like iCloud.

Also I would guess there would be copy-on-write and other such optimizations at Github. It's unlikely that when you fork a repo, somewhere on a disk the entire .git is being copied (but even if it was, it's not that expensive).

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

#128

Post by josephg »

Joel_Mckay wrote: post #41
ttul wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah. Most of my public repos have 0 stars. Most of what I write sucks.

Yeah, but knowing something sucks means you are probably reasonably competent at coding. =3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

No it doesn't. The people with the lowest self perception also have the lowest actual skill. Look at the chart:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect#...

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

#129

Post by throw5 »

kristopolous wrote: post #112
thorum wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stars have been useless as signals for project quality for a while. They’re mostly bought, at this point. I regularly see obviously vibe-coded nonsense projects on GitHub’s Trending page with 10,000 stars. I don’t believe 10,000 people have even cloned the repo, much less gotten any personal value from it. It’s meaningless.

I'm with you on all points except for it being bought. Programming has long succumbed to influencer dynamics and is subject to the same critiques as any other kind of pop creation. Popular restaurants, fashion, movies - these aren't carefully crafted boundary pushing masterpieces. Pop books are hastily written and usually derivative. Pop music is the same as is pop art. Popular podcasts and YouTube channels are usual…

> I'm with you on all points except for it being bought.

Stars get bought all the time. I've been around startup scene and this is basically part of the playbook now for open core model. You throw your code up on GitHub, call it open source, then buy your stars early so it looks like people care. Then charge for hosted or premium features.

There's a whole market for it too. You can literally pay for stars, forks, even fake activity. Big star count makes a project look legit at a glance, especially to investors or people who don't dig too deep. It feeds itself. More people check it out, more people star it just because others already did.

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

#130

Post by gnabgib »

josephg wrote: post #128
Joel_Mckay wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but knowing something sucks means you are probably reasonably competent at coding. =3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

No it doesn't. The people with the lowest self perception also have the lowest actual skill. Look at the chart: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect#...

That isn't what that shows, and the article you linked to even warns:

> In popular culture, the Dunning–Kruger effect is sometimes misunderstood as claiming that people with low intelligence are generally overconfident, instead of denoting specific overconfidence of people unskilled at particular areas.

Dunning-Kruger has also been discredited with suggestion they may have been over confident themselves:

The Dunning-Kruger Effect Is Probably Not Real (2020) https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/critical-thinking/dunning-...

Debunking the Dunning‑Kruger effect – the least skilled people know how much they don’t know, but everyone thinks they are better than average (2023) https://theconversation.com/debunking-the-dunning-kruger-eff... the Dunning‑Kruger effect – the least skilled people know how much they don’t know, but everyone thinks they are better than average

Post reply on HN