291–300 of 329 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's certainly a way to avoid questions... I mean sure, but everybody else is talking about how your humongous PRs are a burden to review.
Which is something I agreed with and apologized for, and admitted was somewhat of a PR stunt. Now, what's your question?
You should be blocked, banned, and ignored.
> Now, what was your question?
Your attitude stinks. So does your complete lack of consideration for others.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm strictly talking about the 10-line Zig PR above. Well-documented and tested.
It's worth asking yourself something: people have written substantial responses to your questions in this thread. Here you answered four paragraphs with two fucking lines referencing and repeating what you've already said. How do you expect someone to react? How can you expect anybody to take seriously anything you say, write, or commit when you obviously have so little ability, or willingness, to engage with others…
Shower thought: what does a typical conversation with an LLM look like? You ask it a question, or you give a command. The model spends some time writing a large wall of text, or performing some large amount of work, probably asks some follow up questions. Most of the output is repetitive slop so the user scans for the direct answer to the question, or checks if the tests work, promptly ignores the follow-ups and proceeds to the next task.
Then the user goes to an online forum and carries on behaving the same way: all posts are instrumental, all of the replies are just directing, shepherding, shaping and cajoling the other users to his desired end (giving him recognition and a job).
I'm probably reading too much into this one dude but perhaps daily interaction with LLMs also changes how one interacts with other text based entities in their lives.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This would be fine if LLMs generated quality code, which they don't. Anything beyond trivial and boilerplate code is either riddled with errors or copied almost verbatim. None of these systems are able to even remotely do what a competent developer does. Despite the PR author's claims, LLMs have no, and can't have any, understanding of the code. Especially when you start talking about architecture, robustness, securi…
This is an excerpt from the session where AI is writing my Lisp compiler. What do you call this? I call this doing what a competent developer does! 39/40 tests pass. The native reader works for integers, hexadecimal, lists, strings and quote forms. The one failure is symbol comparison (known limitation). Based on the context summary and the user's note about cleanup, I should: 1. Continue Phase 3.5 self-compilation 2…
I've closed my share of AI-generated PRs on some OSS repositories I maintain. These contributors seem to jump from one project to another, until their contribution is accepted (recognized ?). I wonder how long the open-source ecosystem will be able to resist this wave. The burden of reviewing AI-generated PRs is already not sustainable for maintainers, and the number of real open-source contributors is decreasing. Si…
Does your own experience align with that of the maintainer who wrote: > in my personal experience, reviewing AI-written code is more taxing that reviewing human-written code
I'm the author of the PR. No, I'm not AI or bot, etc. Yes, my resume is genuine and is even more weird than what was listed (see https://joel.id/resume ). Oh, and I live in Kyiv. As for the PR itself, it was a PR stunt that I regret now as the code works and solves a real problem (at least for me!). I'll probably redo it, once I have spare Claude $$$ which I'm using for other projects now ( https://joel.id/build-your…
Smiles, exclamations, and faux-interest won't prevent people from noticing you are utterly inconsiderate and self-obsessed. Though they may be too polite to say it to your face.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't always use OCaml (meme coming in 1...2...3) and maintaining a fork is a significant undertaking. More importantly, being able to debug native OCaml binaries and actually see source code, values of variables, etc. is something that's useful to everyone. Looking at assembler instead of source code sucks unless you are reverse-engineering.
Why are you submitting a PR if you do not use the software? You could just as easily donate the money that you spent producing 13k LOC to the project and they would spend it to use Claud on things that need to be fixed or just pay themselves to fix things manually. This way there were hours, kwh, and dollars wasted on something that will be of no use to anyone.
The PR explains why I did the work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm strictly talking about the 10-line Zig PR above. Well-documented and tested.
It's worth asking yourself something: people have written substantial responses to your questions in this thread. Here you answered four paragraphs with two fucking lines referencing and repeating what you've already said. How do you expect someone to react? How can you expect anybody to take seriously anything you say, write, or commit when you obviously have so little ability, or willingness, to engage with others…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's worth asking yourself something: people have written substantial responses to your questions in this thread. Here you answered four paragraphs with two fucking lines referencing and repeating what you've already said. How do you expect someone to react? How can you expect anybody to take seriously anything you say, write, or commit when you obviously have so little ability, or willingness, to engage with others…
>I really, truly don't understand. This isn't just about manners, mores, or self-reflection. The inability or unwillingness to think about your behavior or its likely reception are stupefying. Shower thought: what does a typical conversation with an LLM look like? You ask it a question, or you give a command. The model spends some time writing a large wall of text, or performing some large amount of work, probably as…
Facing random people in the public court of opinion is not one of them!
Also, there's long-form writing in my blog posts, Twitter and Reddit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn't say they were dismissive of AI, just that they are unwilling to merge code that they don't have the time or motivation to review. If you want AI code merged, make it small so it it's an easy review. That being said, I completely understand being unwilling to merge AI code at all.
Why would you be unwilling to merge AI code at all? Consider my other PR against the Zig compiler [1]... I was careful to make it small and properly document it but there's a strict anti-AI policy for Zig and they closed the PR. Why? Is it not small? Not carefully documented? Is there no value it int? I'm not complaining or arguing for justice. I'm genuinely interested in how people think in this instance. If the sau…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's certainly a way to avoid questions... I mean sure, but everybody else is talking about how your humongous PRs are a burden to review.
Which is something I agreed with and apologized for, and admitted was somewhat of a PR stunt. Now, what's your question?