191–200 of 252 posts
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
It's good to raise people's expectations of themselves
One of the guys these days told me he's using claude code and developed 20 projects in last 4 weeks. I asked him, how many people are using any of them? He told me it's just him.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
[flagged]
Do people really put weight in stars? It seems completely unrelated to anything but, well, popularity. Even when I modify other peoples' code I fork to a private repo and maintain my changes separately, and I'm fairly certain I have never starred a repo.
When I started reading commit data, it became painfully apparent that a very large number of repos are tests, demos, or tutorials. If you have at least 1 star, that excludes most of those - unless you starred it yourself. Having 2 stars excludes the projects that are self-starred.
Starring is also quite common with my friends and colleagues as a way to find repos again later, so there is some use to it, but I agree it's not a perfect indicator of utility or quality.
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!
(But I don't use AI on them.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 fac…