This raises some questions:
* Does the spec become part of the repository?
* Does "true open source" require that?
* Is the spec what you edit?
Automatic Programming
141–150 of 257 posts
Re: Automatic Programming
#142I think Antirez is gonna change his tune about this as soon as OpenAI et.al. start requesting royalties from software you built using their AI.
I think he would too, but they’re obviously not going to do that.
"OpenAI is exploring licensing models tied to customer outcomes, including pharma partnerships." [1]
"OpenAI CFO Sarah Friar sketched a future in which the company's business models evolve beyond subscriptions and could include royalty streams tied to customer results." [1]
"Speaking on a recent podcast, Friar floated the possibility of "licensing models" in which OpenAI would get paid when a customer's AI-enabled work produces measurable outcomes." [1]
$30 a month or whatever amount of $$ per token does not justify the valuation of these companies. But you know what does? 5% of revenue from your software that their AI helped you to create. I can see world in which you must state you've used their AI to write code and you must use specific licenses to that code, which allows them part of your revenue.
[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/openai-cfo-sarah-friar-futur...
Re: Automatic Programming
#143I think Antirez is gonna change his tune about this as soon as OpenAI et.al. start requesting royalties from software you built using their AI.
No problem, we'll switch to EU/Chinese models in a blink. Just started using Kimi 2.5 a couple days ago and it's almost on par with Opus 4.5.
Re: Automatic Programming
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also it's not only the work of "the model" it's the work of human beings the model is trained on, often illegally.
Copyright infringement is a tort. “Illegal” is almost always used to refer to breaking of criminal law. This seems like intentionally conflating them to imply that appropriating code for model training is a criminal offense, when, even in the most anti-AI, pro-IP view, it is plainly not.
> “Illegal” is almost always used to refer to breaking of criminal law.
This is false, at least in general usage. It is very common to hear about civil offenses being referred to as illegal behavior.
Re: Automatic Programming
#145Re: Automatic Programming
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think he would too, but they’re obviously not going to do that.
"OpenAI is exploring licensing models tied to customer outcomes, including pharma partnerships." [1] "OpenAI CFO Sarah Friar sketched a future in which the company's business models evolve beyond subscriptions and could include royalty streams tied to customer results." [1] "Speaking on a recent podcast, Friar floated the possibility of "licensing models" in which OpenAI would get paid when a customer's AI-enabled wo…
This won’t happen with general software though, that ship has sailed, the space is too competitive.
Re: Automatic Programming
#147[stub for offtopicness]
How does it feel to see all your programming heroes turn into Linkedin-style influencers?
This. Thanks. It's a relief to see I am not the only one completely disappointed. I still believe that these posts are just an ad stunt to publicize their soon-to-be released AI tool. If they really believe what they're writing, it's really sad.
Re: Automatic Programming
#148I have 30+ years of industry experience and I've been leaning heavily into spec driven development at work and it is a game changer. I love programming and now I get to program at one level higher: the spec. I spend hours on a spec, working with Claude Code to first generate and iterate on all the requirements, going over the requirements using self-reviews in Claude first using Opus 4.5 and then CoPilot using GPT-5.…
What's amusing to me is that PRIDE, the oldest generally available software methodology and perhaps the least appreciated, is basically just "spec driven development with human programmers". Most of the time, and personnel, involved in development is on elucidating the requirements and developing the spec; programmers only get involved at the end and their contribution is about 15%. For a few decades this was considered the "correct" way to develop software. But then PCs happened, mom-and-pop software vendors stuffing floppy disks into Ziploc happened, and the myth of the lone "genius programmer" took hold of the industry, and programmers experienced such prestige inflation that they thought they were able to call the shots, and by and large management acquiesced. And that's how we got Agile.
With the rise of AI, maybe programmers will be put back in their rightful place, as contributors of the final small piece of the development process: a translation from business terms to the language of the computer. Programming as a profession should, by all rights, be obsolete. We should be able to express the solution directly in business terms and have the translation take place automatically. Maybe that day will be here soon.
Re: Automatic Programming
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does it feel to see all your programming heroes turn into Linkedin-style influencers?
I don't see Carmack or Torvalds doing this, so it's all good (for now).
In case you didn’t know, Linus does vibe code now:
Re: Automatic Programming
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see Carmack or Torvalds doing this, so it's all good (for now).
How big of a Carmack fan are you really, if you don't know one of his most well known takes on programming? (And you definitely don't need to be a fan.) Carmack has been heavily in favor of leveraging power tools since way back. Direct quote from the man himself: > I will engage with what I think your gripe is — AI tooling trivializing the skillsets of programmers, artists, and designers. > My first games involved ha…
[flagged]