331–340 of 534 posts
Until then: It's interesting to see curl vs rsync in this space.
Both have been hit by AI bots (or attempts to write/debug code by llm or raise llm bugs), but its interesting to see how the curl maintainer handled this vs how rsync is being affected.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it's dangerous to refuse to understand whats happening broadly, and what's taking place in this thread, and to signal that it's ok to keep refusing to understand it. the anger that's showing up around ai isn't a matter of the masses being misinformed, or the messaging around it, it's a matter of physics. you have this one thing that is being used as an excuse to lay people off en masse, you have tech ceos near daily…
> the anger that's showing up around ai isn't a matter of the masses being misinformed Isn't it though? let me quote my other comments in this thread: > There is undoubtedly AI-written code in the Linux kernel now, but are they out there harassing those maintainers? No. rsync GitHub is easier to brigade. > They’re also all completely disingenuous (“I’ll have to stop using rsync now”) given that 99.99% of software now…
source?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which part of security fixing demands thoughtless generation of code slop without regression testing though? I worked on major OSS projects and we never just blindly pushed out untested poor quality code for security fixes since that adds WORSE security regressions.
I am discussing outcomes, not methodology. The methodology describes the effort you may be putting into something, The outcomes are about what results are you prepared to accept. Would you ship an update with a security fix if it had been thoroughly tested was shown to have certain regressions but no worse security regressions? Would you refuse to fix the security issue until you could do so without any degradation?…
You'd have to test to know this, and there is no evidence that tridge did this regression testing - or ask Claude to find possible regressions caused by proposed changes. If tridge did test for regressions, but chose not to document the regression, then it's still negligence, regardless of the tools pr processes involved.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Change happens fast, a year old model is pretty outdated. I'm sure it can happen, hence why I said to keep an eye out. Its main mode of operation is not to cook the tests however.
Happened to me, 3 days ago - deleted some tests and flipped assertions after outlining that it wasn't to change any assertions. Our team was doing a similar task to move between test frameworks, and I had to do a git diff of hundreds of thousands of lines to try and work out where a test had disappeared to.
Your fault. You should have used a model from 0.000005 seconds ago!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There must be some degree of communication from customers to developers. Even if it is a free volunteer service. Poor communication results in professionals firing the customer as well. None of this is exclusive to OSS of volunteer effort. But the communication in general is necessary. This is just product management and communication issues. There is an perceived problem and the problem MUST be communicated. Problem…
These are not customers.
This whole brigading is bizzarre and some people are behaving like irrational animals. I potentially understand the motivations that might bring one to want to "win" this battle but this really isn't it - it just makes you sound like a fanatic. It takes 5 minutes to search for "regression" on the issue page and go through the 17 results. There are potentially even more on the tracker used prior to github. I think thi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is that suppose to make this better? IME the most valuable tests are those that test specific regressions. It's the scaffolding we build for ourselves to enable feature development. Remove that scaffolding and you get accidents. Pray to your god of choice these accidents don't cause harm or loss of life. It should really be considered negligence at this point. Some of this software is extremely valuable, it's how we…
I hear you, OTOH if this software was so valuable how come we aren’t funding it? A lot of the world runs on OSS with a coupe overwhelmed maintainers who get treated as if they owed everybody working software yet can’t make a living off it.
Also it's why we need to pass things like medicare for all and universal childcare to give workers some breathing room if they want to change jobs/industries without condemning them to death or poverty.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am discussing outcomes, not methodology. The methodology describes the effort you may be putting into something, The outcomes are about what results are you prepared to accept. Would you ship an update with a security fix if it had been thoroughly tested was shown to have certain regressions but no worse security regressions? Would you refuse to fix the security issue until you could do so without any degradation?…
> ...if it had been thoroughly tested was shown to have certain regressions but no worse security regressions? You'd have to test to know this, and there is no evidence that tridge did this regression testing - or ask Claude to find possible regressions caused by proposed changes. If tridge did test for regressions, but chose not to document the regression, then it's still negligence, regardless of the tools pr proce…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I think this behavior is very silly and people are just trying to justify their hate to AI by latching onto every possible thing It's not silly to have issues with something. People act on their issues. Possibly not the issue underlying the commit at hand here but something else, and act on it which makes it something to consider. My guess is people are tired of the "AI is the greatest thing since [cultural referen…
> My guess is people are tired of the "AI is the greatest thing since [cultural reference]" being forced down their throat and grasp at every straw to combat it, which is a sane response in my opinion and should be taken into account. Let's engage in some parallelism then This happens with literally everything in our society. Right now, every single food product seems to be infused with protein. In the past, they've…
Yes, but some should absolutely be caught with a robust test suite, especially if it is not an edge case.
When was the last time there was a breaking regression in SQLite again?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems like that it's not that coding agents are to blame, its that the people who are ultimately responsible for committing and merging the offending code are to blame, regardless of its origin.
Or no one is to blame, if the mechanism of the regression is complex and non-obvious based just on the patch itself.