Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Please Do Not Vibe Fuck Up This Software

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 534 posts

Re: Please Do Not Vibe Fuck Up This Software

#461

Post by newtonsmethod »

zzo38computer wrote: post #453

My opinion is that they should not use AI/LLMs to program this, but I think this is not the proper way to make a bug report (and that the use of AI/LLMs is not necessarily itself a bug, even though I do have concerns and objections about their use). They should post the text directly rather than a picture of the text, and it (and the issue title) should describe what is not working in the correct details (in this cas…

I don't actually see much evidence the usage of AI here was an issue. I think you can obviously identify areas where the code isn't perfect. I'd blame this slightly on human prompting, slightly on AI.

But I'm not a sure a human on their own would've done better. There aren't enough resources to make the changes required.

Re: Please Do Not Vibe Fuck Up This Software

#462

Post by newtonsmethod »

worik wrote: post #457
Sacho wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's like people telling you they will paint your house for free, even though the color of your house is perfectly fine You are perfectly capable of saying "No, I like the color of my house already". Just pin rsync's version. This isn't some esoteric mechanism, it's standard practice. If you were actually willing to charitably engage, tidge was working on fixing security bugs - your house had holes in it already! Y…

> Just pin rsync's version Very bad advice these days.

There's a comment on the GitHub thread which also mentions pinning rsync version would be a bad idea. Many of the people affected by reversions are those with workflows vulnerable to the prior CVEs.

Re: Please Do Not Vibe Fuck Up This Software

#463

Post by Hendrikto »

throwaway7356 wrote: post #442
Hendrikto wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Some of those recent bugs were caused by unnecessary vibe-coded changes. 2. Of course bugs should be fixed. I even say so in the comment you replied to. You are attacking a strawman. 3. People will always make feature requests. Some want rsync to be able to make a sandwich. That is not really in-scope for the project though. I think the GNU coreutils are doing this largely right. New features are almost never adde…

> Some of those recent bugs were caused by unnecessary vibe-coded changes. If you think that fixing security issues is "unnecessary changes", maybe. Though maybe security is not "in-scope" for you? > That is not really in-scope for the project though. Why do you decide what is in scope for the rsync project and what not? Apparently the maintainer disagrees and also wants to fix existing security issues.

> > People will [make] requests [that] rsync [should be able] to make a sandwich. That is not really in-scope for the project though.

> Why do you decide what is in scope for the rsync project and what not?

If you are arguing for making sandwiches being in scope for rsync, you proved that you are just a troll. We have reached the end of reasonable discussion.

Re: Please Do Not Vibe Fuck Up This Software

#465

Post by bigstrat2003 »

lukaslalinsky wrote: post #144
koehler wrote: post #36

I truly don't get it You have a rock solid piece of software used by an infinite amount of people and other services. It works fine, does it's job and just have some time to time updates due to minor bug fixes. Why do we need AI here? And more over, why people is saying "fork it and use the previous version". It should be actually all the way around, create a parallel fork younamethetool-ai and keep the OG untouched.…

That's up to the maintainer to decide, no? If they decide to use AI to write more tests, then they do it. It's not like they owe the public something. If the "public" wants to take the project over and maintain it, they can fork it, but it's a thankless job.

Sure, it's up to the maintainer. But it's also not unreasonable for the users to say "this approach is going to have problems, please reconsider". Obviously, you can take that too far - and the Internet being what it is, we would expect to see that happening a lot of the time. But it's not inherently unreasonable to ask the maintainer to reconsider his approach.

Re: Please Do Not Vibe Fuck Up This Software

#466

Post by bigstrat2003 »

charcircuit wrote: post #257
theonemind wrote: post #14

I find the way that issue was opened incredible obnoxious, but it is baffling that the maintainers seem to have let AI loose on rsync. Like, why? Why try comparatively experimental crap when your fortune and reputation is made and you're the leader of a niche and immune to market pressure and the people love the thing and it does exactly what it's supposed to and works well? It's like the Matrix, with the little rant…

[flagged]

> The industry standard is that most code changes are AI generated.

That is absolutely not the case.

Re: Please Do Not Vibe Fuck Up This Software

#467

Post by bigstrat2003 »

DonsDiscountGas wrote: post #259
tardedmeme wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed you can step down, but as one of the comments says: > Just because you're giving free soup to the homeless doesn't mean you can piss in it

Okay but if shipping software that has a bug counts as pissing in soup then a lot of people have been doing this for a long time.

Rather, using a tool notorious for making code with a higher error rate than humans is what people are upset about. It's not just having bugs in and of itself.

Re: Please Do Not Vibe Fuck Up This Software

#468

Post by mbrumlow »

Sacho wrote: post #445
mbgerring wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It looks like they’re being attacked because their mission critical software is suddenly experiencing regressions, and the evidence suggests those regressions are in part caused by AI. The regressions are the issue. If the software was working as expected, no one would be coming after them for “the sin of using AI”.

Their mission critical software has bugs in it - security issues, which the rsync maintainer is trying to fix. In his attempt, he introduced regressions*(maybe - because some of the reported regressions list exactly the security issue that is being fixed as their use case...). This happens every day to thousands and thousands of software projects. This is why we have pinned versions, release schedules, different rele…

I thunk you are right. This is just the same old stuff. I think people are reacting because AI is doing something, and that something seems to be accelerating the process of software development. So what people are seeing is the same issues we have always had compressed into tiny time frames.

But there is good news, at least I think. AI is also moving processes ideas and safety guards along at a faster rate. The only real downside is right now, at least, the amount of code being created outside of our safeguards has accelerated much much faster. This has happened in the past with software, so I am not too worried.

Re: Please Do Not Vibe Fuck Up This Software

#469

Post by cyphar »

dannersy wrote: post #60
theonemind wrote: post #14

I find the way that issue was opened incredible obnoxious, but it is baffling that the maintainers seem to have let AI loose on rsync. Like, why? Why try comparatively experimental crap when your fortune and reputation is made and you're the leader of a niche and immune to market pressure and the people love the thing and it does exactly what it's supposed to and works well? It's like the Matrix, with the little rant…

A couple years back, I think I would have bent over backwards to defend the maintainers. It is a gruelling and thankless effort to maintain any open source project, let alone one as established as rsync. I guess I just don't see AI being a net positive anywhere, and I have to see this backlash to using gen AI as a good course correction from the general populous. There are other posts talking about the instant gratif…

> I'm being seen as a Luddite, blind to the advancement

Note that the Luddite movement was actually not opposed to the technology itself, but how it would negatively impact workers' rights and textile quality[1]. Many Luddites were actually highly-skilled machine operators.

Any of that sound familiar?

[1]: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/what-the-luddites-rea...

Post reply on HN