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

Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

pcgamer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 419 posts

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#91

Post by michaelchisari »

ThePhysicist wrote: post #82

Interesting that on one hand the valuation of these AI providers is based on the assumption that all code (and everything else producing digital artefacts) will be written using AI in the near future, on the other hand almost all popular open source projects fight to keep AI contributions out. Hard to reconcile. Personally I'm also experiencing a bit of AI hangover after using it a lot in my own open-source projects.…

Moving fast was a huge moat for a long time, but now moving fast is easy. Quality might be the new moat.

Important to note that fast never meant much to open source and for good reason.

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#92

Post by ivorius »

whateverboat wrote: post #78
ivorius wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - Negative: Submitters just add stylistic markers to make their accounts and output seem human-generated. This is like syntactic sugar: the core content and the size of contributions stay the same, but the style gets quirkier. From my experience reviewing, most contributors never read the policies, especially those making a "quick AI PR". I don't expect the new policy to change this much. > Positive: Submitters act…

But now with AI, this should be "easier" for some definition of easy. In the sense that in the past, this might have taken 15 minutes to write, now with AI, this can take 5 minutes to write by first getting AI to produce a summary and then using human judgement to make it better. So, it's a good idea now to actually demand the dream.

If people knew how to get AI to write terse, focused summaries, sure, that might help. I haven't seen many that do (well, ignoring the toupee fallacy).

Though the most important aspect is that we need to know the motivation and thought process, and all AI can do is fabricate a 'plausible' one.

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#94

Post by dspillett »

TomasBM wrote: post #7

It's a fair policy. Getting those verbose, AI-authored walls of text is very annoying, especially when you're expected to thoroughly review it. It's like a denial-of-service attack on the human mind. I can only imagine how frustrating this can get in open projects that get a lot of contributions. However, I don't think this will discourage AI-based coding at all. In fact, I see two potential outcomes of these policie…

> I personally wouldn't care if it was AI-generated or not, as long as the content fit the latter category.

The problem is that a lot of AI contributions are lazily produced without review. Those that have been properly reviewed for correctness (tested to ensure actually working with no obvious undesirable side effects, tweaked where needed to be readable and understandable, fitting the other guidelines of the project, etc) will be indiscernible from human-only contributions, but there are a lot of people who make no such effort so the majority are not nearly this good.

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#95

Post by minraws »

As a former extensive Godot contributor(I haven't contributed much since post 4.1 era), I am sad to see people target a project like Godot with AI Slop PRs.

I am with the maintainers on this one, I am not quite sure how they plan to filter out AI slop, but atleast all slop PRs should stop now, I am sad to not have the free time to contribute to the project or maybe just not enough energy.

In generally, I am just sad that this is where the public contributions and open source has come down to, couldn't we all have been more fun working together, what makes someone think they can vibe code their way to a meaningful PR and not even mention that it's a vibe PR.

Why does this PR appear to add any value, and if it does provide some insights into solving a problem, why do you expect it to be merged and reviewed?

The best defense of these drive by vibe PRs can be I found a bug, tried to fix it, seems to work, here's my code, someone who has more time could take a look and see if it has any insights.

Also only works on PRs that are specifically bug fixes or address some issue specifically. Not your omega 10K+ line feature commits...

Why do some people feel compelled to make these PRs? I am genuinely curious, I don't hate these people but do these folks think that this is adding some value?

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#96

Post by alberto467 »

seanclayton wrote: post #84
degamad wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be part of the non-functional reasons mentioned in the next paragraph.

> I can't That makes much more sense now. The inability is completely on you, and you admit it at least.

You can’t understand the difference between functional and non-functional.

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#97

Post by dspillett »

watwut wrote: post #49
ivorius wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> - Negative: Submitters just add stylistic markers to make their accounts and output seem human-generated. This is like syntactic sugar: the core content and the size of contributions stay the same, but the style gets quirkier. From my experience reviewing, most contributors never read the policies, especially those making a "quick AI PR". I don't expect the new policy to change this much. > Positive: Submitters act…

> From my experience reviewing, most contributors never read the policies, especially those making a "quick AI PR". I don't expect the new policy to change this much. The policy allows the reviewer to reject it on the "AI" grounds.

> allows the reviewer to reject it on the "AI" grounds

… but still unfortunately leaves reviewers having to spend time checking submissions and rejecting them.

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#99

Post by prymitive »

Silicon Valley is working round the clock to make bad behaviour as cheap and easy as possible, while taking all the profits. PR floods are probably the most innocent of this. Imagine if you want to send someone abusive text, previously you’d have to spend time and energy writing insults, now the machine can text or even phone someone on your behalf and harass them all day all night. Being a pest to the society was never as easy as right now.

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#100

Post by d1sxeyes »

ThePhysicist wrote: post #82

Interesting that on one hand the valuation of these AI providers is based on the assumption that all code (and everything else producing digital artefacts) will be written using AI in the near future, on the other hand almost all popular open source projects fight to keep AI contributions out. Hard to reconcile. Personally I'm also experiencing a bit of AI hangover after using it a lot in my own open-source projects.…

The key problem is that traditionally, OSS contributions were self-selecting. Basically, to create a PR, you had to be invested in the project. To create a contribution of value, you had to understand the codebase, the conventions, engage a little with the project, and generally the folks doing it are doing so because they like the project, or because they are scratching a specific itch they have etc.

What AI unlocks is contributions from folks who are not at all involved in the project, and creating a PR is no longer enough to clear the gate of “this person is at least somewhat interested in the success of the project”.

AI is a force multiplier when wielded properly, but as an OSS maintainer, it’s easy to drown in prolific, low value “contributions” from folks who don’t care about the project.

Post reply on HN