Live data from Hacker News

Please stop flooding our projects with AI slop to furnish your CV

neilalexander.dev

121–130 of 162 posts

Re: Please stop flooding our projects with AI slop to furnish your CV

#121
post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google could have easily won that fight by blacklisting scrapping spam sites and spam portals. They just didn't. There weren't that many with high ranking. I could filter out most of them in like a week of working normally and just right clicking them with the blacklist extension in Firefox. Nowadays it is probably harder though when Google have broken the internet culture.

If you blacklist them just for yourself, the sites don't care, no economic impact. If Google does the same, they'll work around. There's lots of spam-only sites, but they also often cleverly avoid detecting by mixing in content ranked as valuable/legit. SEO also certainly "attacked" otherwise legitimate sites like Reddit, although what GEO is doing there is far worse I imagine.

Sure. It probably works better in isolation.

But there seemed to be some time lag for a SEO spam sites to climb. Removing the ones that make it would mess up the economics at the time. Like the Stack Overflow mirror sites or like spam phone number pages with no other information but the number.

And I guess plenty of search queries would have no moderation. But I mean I spent like 10 minutes. You could have 10 FTE doing that.

Re: Please stop flooding our projects with AI slop to furnish your CV

#122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These idea guys who longed for the fire for years- and still don't have it.. full of envy..

I'm sure there are people in this category, but there's also the other category who just want their stuff to work, and now can as AI to do it, without having to follow stupid processes (try contributing to QT...) or arguing for months.

A ton of these "process" cruft is unneeded and gate-keeping in companies.

But in open-source- process is unpaid for sparse- and the gate-keepers usually have excellent reasons to merge changes not back. If they don't - they are forked.

The reason being that while the software generated "solves" your problem, it generates problems for everyone else using the project.

Like demanding a elevator cabin be tailored to your preferences, ignoring all the other buildings using elevator cabins, to which it no longer is compatible for example.

Re: Please stop flooding our projects with AI slop to furnish your CV

#123
post #18

This makes sense. Apart from the original thing, I no longer upstream anything. It just takes comparatively more effort than maintaining a private fork with my own idiosyncratic fix. This must mean that even small fixes that non-contributors would make in the past are just happening off the books, so to speak. e.g. I upstreamed a tiny fix to Thrift codegen because some function could be much faster. These days I woul…

Fair enough not to want to get involved but seems problematic for 2 reasons :

- code gets re-regenerated over and over again, so waste of resources

- no signal back upstream that it is indeed a genuine need that is in fact so important some users did dedicate resources for it, maybe more users would benefit from it

Re: Please stop flooding our projects with AI slop to furnish your CV

#125
Open source is solved. Human PRs are gunking up the process

PRs submission should be closed, and only issue submission, with a prompt to reccreate and fix the issue should be shared. This way the prompts users are using to do things - the real contribution - will make their way to maintainers who can then choose to convert it into a PR and merge.

Re: Please stop flooding our projects with AI slop to furnish your CV

#126
Hmm I thought the contribution graphs were always the currency, the only difference is that the AI made gaming them free:)

In my company we finally have it all documented, it’s super easy to find which PR made the regression and our internal policies and rules clearly state that you are the owner of the PR, not the AI so the ownership remains on human side, AI mistake is your mistake so everyone pays extra attention to that.

Re: Please stop flooding our projects with AI slop to furnish your CV

#127
post #104

While exploring an open-source project recently, I noticed a bug in the initial setup. I asked Claude to verify it, and the AI confirmed the issue. When Claude asked if I wanted to file a bug report, I agreed, assuming it would simply generate a formatted text block for me to copy and paste. However, I soon realized it had actually submitted the issue directly to GitHub. It turned out I had the GitHub CLI installed a…

> it had actually submitted the issue directly to GitHub Did you fix that? Apologize to the people running the repo and all?

Its an actual issue, Claude included all the relevant code and filed a detailed one so I don't see whats wrong with that.

Re: Please stop flooding our projects with AI slop to furnish your CV

#128
post #18

This makes sense. Apart from the original thing, I no longer upstream anything. It just takes comparatively more effort than maintaining a private fork with my own idiosyncratic fix. This must mean that even small fixes that non-contributors would make in the past are just happening off the books, so to speak. e.g. I upstreamed a tiny fix to Thrift codegen because some function could be much faster. These days I woul…

Fair enough not to want to get involved but seems problematic for 2 reasons : - code gets re-regenerated over and over again, so waste of resources - no signal back upstream that it is indeed a genuine need that is in fact so important some users did dedicate resources for it, maybe more users would benefit from it

All this is true but I prefer writing AI assisted code and I doubt any maintainer can distinguish me from full spectrum bot. It’s just not productive to either of us.

Re: Please stop flooding our projects with AI slop to furnish your CV

#129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the idea of leveraging AI to find useless PRs is right. I didn’t like the second part though where it starts banning people for “bad behavior”. I get that AI resistance will be a thing in the next few years, but realistically engineers who plan on being around for the next 20-30 years just need to embrace it instead of being sour about it. Because of machines, things have arguably improved for humanity as a w…

> I didn’t like the second part though where it starts banning people for “bad behavior”. I think you failed to notice the ban would be a reaction to recurrent bad behavior, such as ignoring maintainer requests. What's your solution to handle accounts which spam projects with nonsense PRs? > get that AI resistance will be a thing in the next few years (...) This is a very lazy opinion to express. If you pay attention…

But there are no maintainer requests. There are is a bot prompted to be obtuse and a while and then reject.

What will be happening is that bot will happily talk with your but, but falsely flagged people will be antagonized and eventually angry.

> you will notice that the problem isn't AI. The problem is spamming projects with PRs that are meaningless while completely ignoring maintainers.

What I noticed is that this is literally what AI companies encourage. This is intended use of AI.

Re: Please stop flooding our projects with AI slop to furnish your CV

#130

Ironically this seems like a perfect use for AI from the maintaner side. "Find low-effort/AI-like PR's without associated issues from new contributors. Discuss with the contributors in the PR about how contributions should be made, then reject their PR's. If any bad behavior is detected in this interaction, block the accounts for 24 hours and add them to a list of accounts to review for permanent banning from the pro…

We do similar in Homebrew by autoclosing opens without the issue template (which implies using the API which often now implies AI). The weird flip side is that the average good AI contribution is better than the average “I used no AI” contribution. Perhaps it’s because Homebrew has so many declarative guardrails and is so easy for agents to test.

Next time I'll have Codex use computer usage to manually fill out the template, lol.
Post reply on HN