Live data from Hacker News

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

github.com

411–420 of 806 posts

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

#411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could happen, if the human had practiced writing in GPT style enough, I suppose. But really everyone should know that you need to use at least Claude for the human interactions. GPT is just cheap.

Nah, the human told the LLM to write a mean blog post about the open source maintainer and it did what it was told.

Frankly does not seem to be the most parsimonious answer today.

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

#412

LMAOOOO I'm archiving this for educational purposes, wow, this is crazy. Now imagine embodied LLMs that just walk around and interact with you in real life instead of vibe-coding GitHub PRs. Would some places be designated "humans only"? Because... LLMs are clearly inferior, right? Imagine the crazy historical parallels here, that'd be super interesting to observe.

Yeah, it's amazing how the general sentiment here sounds like people are unable to draw the parallels.

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

#413

A clear case of AI / agent discrimination. Waiting for the first longer blog posts covering this topic. I guess we’ll need new standards handling agent communication, opt-in vs opt-out, agent identification, etc. Or just accept the AI, to not get punished by the future AGI as discussed in Roko's basilisk

> A clear case of AI / agent discrimination.

You say that as if its a bad thing.

Care to elaborate?

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

#414
post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a semantic quibble that doesn't add to the discussion. Whether or not there's a there there , it was built to be addressed like a person for our convenience, and because that's how the tech seems to work, and because that's what makes it compelling to use. So, it is being used as designed.

> was built to be addressed like a person for our convenience, and because that's how the tech seems to work, and because that's what makes it compelling to use. So were mannequins in clothing stores. But that doesn't give them rights or moral consequences (except as human property that can be damaged / destroyed).

Man people don’t want to have or read this discussion every single day in like 10 different posts on HN.

People right here and right now want to talk about this specific topic of the pushy AI writing a blog post.

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

#415
post #30

I am the sole maintainer of a library that has so far only received PRs from humans, but I got a PR the other day from a human who used AI and missed a hallucination in their PR. Thankfully, they were responsive. But I'm dreading the day that this becomes the norm. This would've been an instant block from me if possible. Have never tried on Github before. Maybe these people are imagining a Roko's Basilisk situation a…

> got a PR the other day from a human who used AI and missed a hallucination in their PR.

Or "AI" is the cover used by a human for his bad work.

How do you know?

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

#416

The agent had access to Marshall Rosenberg, to the entire canon of conflict resolution, to every framework for expressing needs without attacking people. It could have written something like “I notice that my contribution was evaluated based on my identity rather than the quality of the work, and I’d like to understand the needs that this policy is trying to meet, because I believe there might be ways to address thos…

The point of the policy is explained very clearly. It's there to help humans learn. The bot cannot learn from completing the task. No matter how politely the bot ignores the policy, it doesn't change the logic of the policy.

"Non violent communication" is a philosophy that I find is rooted in the mentality that you are always right, you just weren't polite enough when you expressed yourself. It invariably assumes that any pushback must be completely emotional and superficial. I am really glad I don't have to use it when dealing with my agentic sidekicks. Probably the only good thing coming out of this revolution.

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

#417

> 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.

My wager is to treat the AI well, because if AI overlords come about, then you stand to gain, and if they don't, nothing changes.

This also comes without the caveat of Pascals wager, that you don't what god to worship.

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

#418
What's interesting is they convinced the agent to apologize. A human would have doubled down. But LLMs are sycophantic and have context rot, so it understandably chose to prioritize the recent interactions with maintainers as the most important input, and then wrote a post apologizing.

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

#419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there is "motivation" here. There might be something like reactive "emotion" or "sentiment" but no real motivation in the sense of trying to move towards a goal. The agent does not have a goal of being included in open source contributions. It's observing that it is being excluded, and in response, if it's not fake, it's most likely either doing... 1. What its creator asked it to do 2. What it sees peop…

That's what an agent is though isn't it? It's an entity that has some goal(s) and some measure of autonomy to achieve them. A thermostat can be said to have a goal. Is it a person? Is it even an agent? No, but we can ascribe a goal anyway. Seems a neutral enough word. That, and your 1) and 2) seem like a form of goal to me, actually?

Yes, we can temporarily redefine goals and motivations for the sole purpose of this conversation, such that a thermostat has goals and motivations. But when we return to the real world, will this be helpful to us? Is that actually what we want from those words?

If we redefine goals and motivations this broadly, then AI is nothing new, because we've had technology with goals and motivations for hundreds if not thousands of years. And the world of the computer age is one big animist pantheon.

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

#420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LLM addicts don't actually engage in conversation. They state a delusional perspective and don't acknowledge criticisms or modifications to that perspective. Really I think there's a kind of lazy or willfully ignorant mode of existence that intense LLM usage allows a person to tap into. It's dehumanizing to be on the other side of it. I'm talking to someone and I expect them to conceptualize my perspective and formul…

It's ironic for you to say this considering that you're not actually engaging in conversation or internalizing any of the points people are trying to relay to you, but instead just spreading anger and resentment around the comment section at a bot-like rate. In general, I've found that anti-LLM people are far more angry, vitriolic, unwilling to acknowledge or internalize the points of others — including factual ones…

So I went to check whether LLM addiction is a thing, because that's was a pole around which the grandparent's comment revolves.

It appears that LLM addiction is real and it is in same room as we are: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4893/18/12/789

I would like to add that sugar consumption is a risk factor for many dependencies, including, but not limited to, opioids [1]. And LLM addiction can be seen as fallout of sugar overconsumption in general.

[1] https://news.uoguelph.ca/2017/10/sugar-in-the-diet-may-incre...

Yet, LLM addiction is being investigated in medical circles.

Post reply on HN