301–310 of 504 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Also, this is dumb because anyone who wants fixes like this will have to find a fork like mine with them Or a human will provide the fix?
a human who looks at the AI generated fix but ‘types it out, the old fashioned way’?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So we're back to might makes right then: "you can't stop me, so I'll do whatever I want to you."
What a reductive argument. Is this your first day on planet earth? If so, here’s what you need to know: - people can just say things - when people say things, you don’t have to listen to them - not listening to them doesn’t make you superior or more powerful than them We can practice: I’d like you to always comment in uppercase letters from now on please. It’s my policy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What a reductive argument. Is this your first day on planet earth? If so, here’s what you need to know: - people can just say things - when people say things, you don’t have to listen to them - not listening to them doesn’t make you superior or more powerful than them We can practice: I’d like you to always comment in uppercase letters from now on please. It’s my policy.
You are literally being the cliché of “Techbros don’t understand consent.” Don’t be that way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t think you’re being serious. Claude and GPT regularly write programs that are way better than what I would’ve written. Maybe you haven’t used a decent harness or a model released in the last year? It’s usually verbose, whereas I would try the simplest thing that could possibly work. However, it can knock out but would have taken me multiple weekends in a few minutes. The value proposition isn’t even close. It’…
> Claude and GPT regularly write programs that are way better than what I would’ve written Is that really true? Like, if you took the time to plan it carefully, dot every i, cross every t? The way I think of LLM's is as "median targeters" -- they reliably produce output at the centre of the bell curve from their training set. So if you're working in a language that you're unfamiliar with -- let's say I wanted to make…
For example just recently I updated a component in one of our modules. The work was fairly rote (in this project we are not allowed to use LLMs). While it was absolutely necessary to do the update here, it was beneficial to do it everywhere else. I didn't do it in other places because I couldn't justify spending the effort.
There are two sides to this - with LLMs, housekeeping becomes easy and effortless, but you often err on the side of verbosity because it costs nothing to write.
But much less thought goes into every line of code, and I often am kinda amazed that how compact and rudimentary the (hand-written) logic is behind some of our stuff that I thought would be some sort of magnum opus.
When in fact the opposite should be the case - every piece of functionality you don't need right now, will be trivial to generate in the future, so the principle of YAGNI applies even more.
The interesting tension here is that "no LLM-generated code" is easy to state but hard to enforce - a developer who uses an LLM to understand a concept and then writes the code themselves is indistinguishable from one who didn't. The policy probably works as a cultural signal more than a technical guarantee, which might be exactly what they want.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What a reductive argument. Is this your first day on planet earth? If so, here’s what you need to know: - people can just say things - when people say things, you don’t have to listen to them - not listening to them doesn’t make you superior or more powerful than them We can practice: I’d like you to always comment in uppercase letters from now on please. It’s my policy.
You are literally being the cliché of “Techbros don’t understand consent.” Don’t be that way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're going to set a firm "no AI" policy, then my inclination would be to treat that kind of PR in the same way the US legal system does evidence obtained illegally: you say "sorry, no, we told you the rules and so you've wasted effort -- we will not take this even if it is good and perhaps the only sensible implementation". Perhaps somebody else will eventually re-implement it later without looking at the AI PR.
You not realizing how ridiculous this is, is exactly why half of all devs are about to get left behind. Like, this should be enshrined as the quintessential “they simply, obstinately, perilously, refused to get it” moment. Shortly, no one is going to care about anyone’s bespoke manual keyboard entry of code if it takes 10 times as long to produce the same functionality with imperceptibly less error.
No one is going to care about anyone’s painstaking avoidance of chlorofluorocarbons if it takes ten times as long to style your hair with imperceptibly less ozone hole damage.
[flagged]
I genuinely feel bad for you. At least it isnt difficult to make the transition to AI Agent coding. Even untrained people are able to do it. At some point your manager is going to force you to AI code. At best you can try to find some healthcare or finance company that is too cheap to buy a machine that can locally run 400B models.
If you're curious to see what everyone else is doing, I did a survey of over 100 major source available projects and four of them banned AI assisted commits (NetBSD, GIMP, Zig, and qemu). On the other hand projects with AI assisted commits you can easily find include Linux, curl, io_uring, MariaDB, DuckDB, Elasticsearch, and so on. Of the 112 projects surveyed, 70 of them had AI assisted commits already. https://thec…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can choose not to contribute instead of intentionally violating their boundaries.
Their boundaries. If they don’t want to accept the code, cool. Nobody is forcing them to, and I respect that. But if they can’t enforce their boundaries, because they can’t tell the difference between AI code and non-AI code without being told, then their boundaries they made up are unenforceable nonsense. About as nonsense and enforceable as asking me to code upside down.
Boundaries - of all kinds - are not unenforceable nonsense, they are rights that you willingly and knowingly violate.