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

141–150 of 252 posts

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

#141

Post by brookst »

kevmo314 wrote: post #138
mjr00 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was really confused how this could be possible for such a seemingly simple site but it looks like it's storing + writing many new commits every time there's a new review, or new financial data, or a new show, etc. Someone might want to tell the author to ask Claude what a database is typically used for...

What is git if not a database for source code?

Meh, then filesystems are databases for bytes. Airplanes are buses for flying.

I could make that argument, but I wouldn’t believe it.

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

#142

Post by duped »

fxtentacle wrote: post #134
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…

I think the instability is mostly due to the CEO running away at the same time as a forced Azure migration where the VP of engineering ran away. There’s only so much stability you can expect from a ship that’s missing 2 captains.

I mean the fish rots from the head, but at the end of the day that rot translates into an engineering culture that doesn't value craftsmanship and quality. Every github product I've used reeks from sloppiness and poor architecture.

That's not to say they don't have people who can build good things. They built the standard for code distribution after all. But you can't help but recognize so much of it is duct taped together to ship instead of crafted and architected with intent behind major decisions that allow the small shit to just work. If you've ever worked on a similar project that evolved that way, you know the feeling.

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

#143

Post by dyauspitr »

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…

That doesn’t make sense. Commits are all text. If YouTube can easily handle 4PB of uploads a day with essentially one large data center that can handle that much daily traffic for the next 20 years, GitHub should have no problems whatsoever.

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

#144

Post by snthpy »

nickcw wrote: post #15
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!

The first thing I do when I make a new repo is star it myself ;-)

Half way there

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

#145

Post by GorbachevyChase »

tlogan wrote: post #18
Aurornis wrote: post #11

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.

Sounds like Claude commits are, on average, going into higher visibility repositories than humans… maybe the author would like to reconsider their approach?

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

#147

Post by fluidcruft »

heavyset_go wrote: post #124
fluidcruft wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

So you're suggesting that an AI translation of, say, a novel removes human authorship from the result? Unless a human goes in and makes further "substantive transformations" to the AI generated work?

And if that's not what you are saying then how are you determining that prompts to and AI are not copyrighted by the author of the prompt? The results are nothing more than a derivative work of the prompt. So you are faced with having to determine whether the prompts themselves or in combination are copyrightable. Depending on the prompt they may or may not be, but you can't apply a blanket rule here.

(Notwithstanding that Claude inserts itself explicitly as co-author and the author is listed on the commit as well)

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

#148

Post by jrod87 »

nickcw wrote: post #15
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!

The first thing I do when I make a new repo is star it myself ;-)

I think this is best practice.

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

#150

Post by brtkwr »

dijksterhuis wrote: post #123
ZeWaka wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

only 80 more repos need 100000 stars and all lines would be equal! e.g.

1 : 14946505

10 : 1196622

100 : 213026

1000 : 28944

10000 : 1847

100000 : 100

Post reply on HN