Earlier quoted context omitted.
each line (mostly) being equal length provides me an odd comfort
power law distribution ~1/x I think
Zipf's law?
90% of Claude-linked output going to GitHub repos w <2 stars
201–210 of 252 posts
Re: 90% of Claude-linked output going to GitHub repos w <2 stars
#202[dead]
Re: 90% of Claude-linked output going to GitHub repos w <2 stars
#203Just to clarify as OP, the point here is not that Claude is not contributing to serious work, just that the dashboard suggests a lot of usage in public GitHub repos seems to be tied to low attention, high LOC repos. This is at least something to keep in mind when considering the composition of coding agent usage, and when assessing the sustainability of current trends. In hindsight the headline was a bit more sensati…
This seems to be the same misunderstanding about agentic coding I see a lot of places. Agentic coding is not about creating software , it's about solving the problems we used to need software to solve directly . The only reason I put my agentic code in a repo is so that I can version control changes. I don't have any intention of sharing that code with other people because it wouldn't be useful for them. If people wa…
I can’t imagine that will stay the case though. I built https://github.com/andonimichael/arxitect as a first step to using agentic coding in a more production ecosystem. Agents will be able to write useful (and high quality) software over time, their training has just under-prioritized code quality thus far
Re: 90% of Claude-linked output going to GitHub repos w <2 stars
#204Earlier quoted context omitted.
Stars have been useless as signals for project quality for a while. They’re mostly bought, at this point. I regularly see obviously vibe-coded nonsense projects on GitHub’s Trending page with 10,000 stars. I don’t believe 10,000 people have even cloned the repo, much less gotten any personal value from it. It’s meaningless.
I'm with you on all points except for it being bought. Programming has long succumbed to influencer dynamics and is subject to the same critiques as any other kind of pop creation. Popular restaurants, fashion, movies - these aren't carefully crafted boundary pushing masterpieces. Pop books are hastily written and usually derivative. Pop music is the same as is pop art. Popular podcasts and YouTube channels are usual…
> Nobody is reading a PhD thesis or a scholarly journal on the bus.
As someone who is involved in academia, I can attest that most of my colleagues (including myself) do in fact read quite a few papers on buses (and trams - can't forget those)
Re: 90% of Claude-linked output going to GitHub repos w <2 stars
#205Earlier quoted context omitted.
No it doesn't. The people with the lowest self perception also have the lowest actual skill. Look at the chart: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect#...
That isn't what that shows, and the article you linked to even warns: > In popular culture, the Dunning–Kruger effect is sometimes misunderstood as claiming that people with low intelligence are generally overconfident, instead of denoting specific overconfidence of people unskilled at particular areas. Dunning-Kruger has also been discredited with suggestion they may have been over confident themselves: The Dunning-…
Are you replying to the wrong comment? The person you're responding to seems to make the same point
Re: 90% of Claude-linked output going to GitHub repos w <2 stars
#206[flagged]
Re: 90% of Claude-linked output going to GitHub repos w <2 stars
#207[flagged]
Re: 90% of Claude-linked output going to GitHub repos w <2 stars
#208who uses stars
Re: 90% of Claude-linked output going to GitHub repos w <2 stars
#209100% of all code I have put on github, using claude or not, is on repos with zero stars.
Yeah, all my serious stuff is proprietary. Github, for me at least, is for trying out ideas and fun. Which is why every project is unfinished. :-)
Re: 90% of Claude-linked output going to GitHub repos w <2 stars
#210Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think this is useful in answering the grandparent comment's question: stars : uniq(k) 1 : 14946505 10 : 1196622 100 : 213026 1000 : 28944 10000 : 1847 100000 : 20
interesting that you only need ~150 stars on a project for it to be in the top 1%
Let's establish a roving band of ~150 GitHub users that go around 1% things.