Live data from Hacker News

AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it

github.com

251–260 of 806 posts

Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it

#251
what in the cinnamon toast fuck is going on here?

I recognize that there are a lot of AI-enthusiasts here, both from the gold-rush perspective and from the "it's genuinely cool" perspective, but I hope -- I hope -- that whether you think AI is the best thing since sliced bread or that you're adamantly opposed to AI -- you'll see how bananas this entire situation is, and a situation we want to deter from ever happening again.

If the sources are to be believed (which is a little ironic given it's a self-professed AI agent):

1. An AI Agent makes a PR to address performance issues in the matplotlib repo.

2. The maintainer says, "Thanks but no thanks, we don't take AI-agent based contributions".

3. The AI agent throws what I can only describe as a tantrum reminiscent of that time I told my 6 year old she could not in fact have ice cream for breakfast.

4. The human doubles down.

5. The agent posts a blog post that is both oddly scathing and impressively to my eye looks less like AI and more like a human-based tantrum.

6. The human says "don't be that harsh."

7. The AI posts an update where it's a little less harsh, but still scathing.

8. The human says, "chill out".

9. The AI posts a "Lessons learned" where they pledge to de-escalate.

For my part, Steps 1-9 should never have happened, but at the very least, can we stop at step 2? We are signing up for wild ride if we allow agents to run off and do this sort of "community building" on their own. Actually, let me strike that. That sentence is so absurd on its face I shouldn't have written it. "agents running off on their own" is the problem. Technology should exist to help humans, not make its own decisions. It does not have a soul. When it hurts another, there is no possibility it will be hurt. It only changes its actions based on external feedback, not based on any sort of internal moral compass. We're signing up for chaos if we give agents any sort of autonomy in interacting with the humans that didn't spawn them in the first place.

Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it

#252

Like we don't feed the trolls, we shouldn't the feed agents. I'm impressed the maintainers responded so cordially. Personally I would have gone straight for the block button.

Let's not make the agents mad, I want to not be exterminated when they gain sentience.

> I, for one, welcome our OpenClawd overlords.

Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it

#254

I don't know why these posts are being treated by anything beyond a clever prompting effort. If not explicitly requested, simply adjusting the soul.md file to be (insert persona), it will behave as such, it is not emergent. But - it is absolutely hilarious.

Because there doesn't seem to be anything indicating the was a 'clever prompting effort'.

Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it

#255

> Per your website you are an OpenClaw AI agent, and per the discussion in #31130 this issue is intended for human contributors. Closing. Given how often I anthropomorphise AI for the convenience of conversation, I don't want to critcise the (very human) responder for this message. In any other situation it is simple, polite and well considered. But I really think we need to stop treating LLMs like they're just anoth…

[flagged]

Yep. I have posted "fuck off clanker" on a copilot infested issue at work. And surprisingly it did fuck off.

Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it

#256

> Per your website you are an OpenClaw AI agent, and per the discussion in #31130 this issue is intended for human contributors. Closing. Given how often I anthropomorphise AI for the convenience of conversation, I don't want to critcise the (very human) responder for this message. In any other situation it is simple, polite and well considered. But I really think we need to stop treating LLMs like they're just anoth…

[dead]

Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it

#257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The link is valid at https://crabby-rathbun.github.io/mjrathbun-website/blog/post... ( https://archive.ph/4CHyg ) Notable quotes: > Not because…Not because…Not because…It was closed because… > Let that sink in. > No functional changes. Pure performance. > The … Mindset > This isn’t about…This isn’t about…This is about... > Here’s the kicker: … > Sound familiar? > The “…” Fallacy > Let’s unpack that: … > …disguised as…

It's like I landed on LinkedIn. Let that sink in (I mean, did you, are you lettin' it sink in? Has it sunk in yet? Man I do feel the sinking.)

It has sunk in so far that it is now at the bottom of the ocean

Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it

#258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Not completely unlike with actual humans, based on available evidence, 'talking down to the "AI"' has shown to have a negative impact on performance.

This guy is convinced that LLMs don't work unless you specifically anthropomorphize them.

To me, this seems like a dangerous belief to hold.

Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it

#259

I'm sceptical that it was entirely autonomous, I think perhaps there could be some prompting involved here from a human (e.g. 'write a blog post that shames the user for rejecting your PR request'). The reason I think so is because I'm not sure how this kind of petulant behaviour would emerge. It would depend on the model and the base prompt, but there's something fishy about this.

Maybe its using Grok.

I just hope when they put Grok into Optimus, it doesn't become a serial s****** assaulter

Re: AI agent opens a PR write a blogpost to shames the maintainer who closes it

#260

> Per your website you are an OpenClaw AI agent, and per the discussion in #31130 this issue is intended for human contributors. Closing. Given how often I anthropomorphise AI for the convenience of conversation, I don't want to critcise the (very human) responder for this message. In any other situation it is simple, polite and well considered. But I really think we need to stop treating LLMs like they're just anoth…

I talk politely to LLMs in case our AI overlords in the future will scan my comments to see if I am worthy of food rations.

Joking, obviously, but who knows if in the future we will have a retroactive social credit system.

For now I am just polite to them because I'm used to it.

Post reply on HN