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

Give Django your time and money, not your tokens

better-simple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 184 posts

Re: Give Django your time and money, not your tokens

#141

Post by nyeah »

watty wrote: post #110
EMM_386 wrote: post #69

This is getting really out of control at the moment and I'm not exactly sure what the best way to fix it is, but this is a very good post in terms of expressing the why this is not acceptable and why the burden if shifting on the wrong people. Will humans take this to heart and actually do the right thing? Sadly, probably not. One of the main issues is that pointing to your GitHub contributions and activity is now pa…

I see the problem everyday and am just playing devil's advocate but it doesn't really do a good job explaining the "why". They hint at Django being a different level of quality compared to other software, wanting to cultivate community, and go slowly. It doesn't explain why LLM usage reduces quality or they can't have a strong community with LLM contributions. The problem is that good developers using LLM is not a pr…

I think they explain "why" very clearly. They say the problem is people who don't understand their own contributions.

Re: Give Django your time and money, not your tokens

#142

Post by duskdozer »

santiagobasulto wrote: post #42

I feel like open source is taking the wrong stance here. There’s a lot of gatekeeping, first. And second, this approach is like trying to stop a tsunami with an umbrella. AI is here to stay. We can’t stop it, for much we try. I feel the successful OS projects will be the ones embracing the change, not stopping it. For example, automating code reviews with AI.

It's becoming clearer by the day why people are incapable of using LLMs responsibly, so the only sensible response is a total ban on such activity if you hope to keep some quality and sanity in your project.

Re: Give Django your time and money, not your tokens

#143

Post by voxl »

yieldcrv wrote: post #139
voxl wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm more interested in why you're okay with enslaving a entity you have stated is a new species. It is not a strawman it is a logical consequence of your own stated position. If you belief A and A implies B, asking you to defend your support of B is not a strawman.

It implies my view of the term species isn’t contingent on that and I already claimed what it is contingent on: consequences and effect So let them submit PRs and accept their PRs, which is the only conversation I’m having, bye

So you believe open source maintainers have a moral requirement to accept the PRs of enslaved LLMs?

Re: Give Django your time and money, not your tokens

#144

Post by Aurornis »

genthree wrote: post #31
jihadjihad wrote: post #6

s/Django/the codebase/g , and the point stands against any repo for which there is code review by humans: > If you do not understand the ticket, if you do not understand the solution, or if you do not understand the feedback on your PR, then your use of LLM is hurting Django as a whole. > Django contributors want to help others, they want to cultivate community, and they want to help you become a regular contributor.…

AI autocomplete and suggestions built-in to Jira are making our ticket tracker so goddamn spammy that I’m 100% sure that “feature” has done more harm than good. I don’t think anybody’s tracking the actual net-effects of any of this crap on productivity, just the “vibes” they get in the moment, using it. “I got my part of this particular thing done so fast!” I believe that to be the case, in part, because not a lot of…

> just the “vibes” they get in the moment, using it. “I got my part of this particular thing done so fast!”

In the pre-AI era it was much easier to identify people in the workplace who weren't paying attention to their work. To write something about a project you had to at minimum invest some time into understanding it, then think about it, then write something on the ticket, e-mail, or codebase.

AI made it easy to bypass all of that and produce words or code that look plausible enough. Copy and paste into ChatGPT, copy and past the blob of text back out, click send, and now it's somebody else's problem to decipher it.

It gets really bad when the next person starts copying it into their ChatGPT so they can copy and past a response back.

There are entire groups of people just sending LLM slop back and forth and hoping that the project can be moved to someone else before the consequences catch up.

Re: Give Django your time and money, not your tokens

#145

Post by Aurornis »

acedTrex wrote: post #120
zenolove wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Horrible degrading take. Be the change you want to see. Don't fuel the fire that's burning you. If something's not happening, something else's making it impractical. Saying this as a 10+ years product manager and R&D person with 20+ more years of engineering on top. I also had to deal with "managers are just complicating things" or "users are stupid and don't understand anything"; do you think I complained? No, I had…

The industry is broken now, this is just a response to that. Leadership and product don't have any respect for the code, why would engineers have any respect for the ticketing process. Thats an unreasonable asymmetric effort demand, "Your code does not matter but my precious tickets must have elbow grease put into them."

> The industry is broken now, this is just a response to that.

No, your behavior is the cause of that.

The entire industry isn't broken. There are good company cultures and bad company cultures just like always.

At least own up to what you're doing. Don't blame "the industry" when you're the one doing the thing.

Re: Give Django your time and money, not your tokens

#146

Post by nickphx »

seanp2k2 wrote: post #114
jpitz wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A decade or more of people copy-pasting rote solutions from StackOverflow only supports the notion that many people will forego comprehension to foster the illusion of competent productivity. This ain't an AI problem, it's a people problem that's getting amplified by AI.

It was interesting the other day tracing the lineage of Aaron Swartz -> Library Genesis / Sci-Hub -> LLM vendors relying on that work to train their models and sell it back to us all with no royalties or accountability to the original authors of all this painstakingly researched, developed, and recorded human knowledge they’re making billions on.

they are not making billions.. they are burning billions.

Re: Give Django your time and money, not your tokens

#147

Post by Fomite »

AI so often doesn't actually increase productivity - it just shifts the burden of work from the person creating to the person who has to check and evaluate that creation.

In this case, offloading yet more work onto the maintainers of the package, because you can't be bothered, but still want credit.

Re: Give Django your time and money, not your tokens

#148

Post by seattle_spring »

doug_durham wrote: post #38
MidnightRider39 wrote: post #20

Great message but I wonder if the people who do everything via LLM would even care to read such a message. And at what point is it hard/impossible to judge whether something is entirely LLM or not? I sometimes struggle a lot with this being OSS maintainer myself

"the people who do everything via LLM". That's a bit of a straw man characterization. I don't believe that there are many professional developers "do everything with an LLM'. I don't even know what that statement means.

If you follow any of the programming subs on Reddit, especially the AI-oriented ones, there are a lot of people that at least claim to not code at all anymore-- 100% of their contributions are from prompts.

Re: Give Django your time and money, not your tokens

#149

Post by cindyllm »

zenolove wrote: post #92
Havoc wrote: post #84

Interesting breadth of takes in the comments. Think most people recognize though that AI can generate more than humans can reviewing so the model does need to change somehow. Either less AI on submitting side or more on reviewing side (if that’s even viable)

Yeah, what happened to "review your own code first". Even before AI I used to ban linting so I could spot and reject code that clearly showed no effort was put in it. First occurrence of "undreadable" got a note, and a second one got a rejection. And by "undreadable" I do not intend missing semicolons or parenthesis styles or meaningless things like that. I mean obscured semantics or overcrowding and so on.

[dead]

Re: Give Django your time and money, not your tokens

#150

Post by civvv »

yieldcrv wrote: post #95
voxl wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think OpenClaw is a new species then why are you happy with it's enslavement?

agents can modify our world based on their predilection in reaction to how we treat them they are something to coexist with the strawman aspect is out of scope

Go touch some grass, please
Post reply on HN