481–490 of 504 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
You’d send me a contributor agreement, after I’ve contributed, to retroactively ask if I used a LLM to write the code, and if I refused you’d then sue me for nebulous ill-defined damages and for breaching a non-existent contract? So in your head, I could contribute a change that introduces a bug and as a result you could sue me for the time it took you to fix it? … Are you OK? I was hoping for something with a “I’m a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would I ask annoying questions when I can identify, reproduce, pinpoint the bug, locate it in code, and fix it? Doing it alone should make it clear I don't need to ask to understand it. And why would I be interested in small talk? Doubt many people are when they patch up their work tools. It's a dispassionate kind of kindness. Not to mention LLMs can be annoying, too. Demand this, and you'll only be inviting bots…
> Why would I ask annoying questions when I can identify, reproduce, pinpoint the bug, locate it in code, and fix it? Because if the bug is sufficiently simple that an outsider with zero context to fix, there's a non-zero chance that the maintainers know about it and have a reason why it hasn't been addressed yet i.e. the bug fix may have backwards-compatibility implications for other users which you aren't aware of.…
Also feel free to consider the PR itself to be the question, just with said context presented in one go instead of a back and forth. Feels more respectful, too. In the end, if it's not getting merged because of some weird hacky edge case, then my code will still live on in my fork.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep, that’s why my forks of all their libraries with bugs fixed such as https://github.com/pmarreck/zigimg/commit/52c4b9a557d38fe1e1... will never ever go back to upstream, just because an LLM did it. Lame, but oh well- their loss. Also, this is dumb because anyone who wants fixes like this will have to find a fork like mine with them, which is an increased maintenance burden.
The commit you listed was merged upstream. https://github.com/zigimg/zigimg/pull/313
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Any thoughts on why you have that preference?
Because human errors are, well, human. And producing code that contains those errors is a human endeavor. It bases on years, decades of learning. Mistakes were made, experience was gained, skills were improved. Reasoning by humans is relatable. Generating slop using LLMs takes seconds, has no human element, no work goes into it. Mistakes made by an LLM are excused without sincerity, without real learning, without con…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but back in reality no you’re not? No more than any other contributor? If I want to use an auto-complete then I can, and I will? Restricting that is as regressive as a project trying to specify that I write code from a specific country or… standing on my head. Sure, if they want me to add a “I’m writing this standing on my head” message in the PR then I will… but I’m not.
No, you can't. See, that's where you are just wrong: when you don't respect the boundaries an open source project sets that you want to contribute to then you are a net negative. Restricting this is their right, and it is not for you to attempt to overrule that right. Besides the fact that you do not oversee the consequences it also makes you an asshole. They're not asking for you to write standing on your head, they…
This is such an easily refuted assertion. Tell me, if something is wrong with the submitted code, who or what is responsible? If it's not "the LLM", then your opinion makes zero sense. The responsible party is always a human; therefore the responsible party rightfully deserves the credit whether it succeeds or fails.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, "might makes right", essentially?
No, just a normal reaction to someone trying to force their beliefs on you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but back in reality no you’re not? No more than any other contributor? If I want to use an auto-complete then I can, and I will? Restricting that is as regressive as a project trying to specify that I write code from a specific country or… standing on my head. Sure, if they want me to add a “I’m writing this standing on my head” message in the PR then I will… but I’m not.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> At that point you've proven intention, meaning you'll get the chance to argue your viewpoint in front of a judge. Sure, put out an international search warrant for xXImADogOnTheInternet86Xx.
Please stop embarrassing yourself, that's unnecessary. Many major projects now require a signed DCO with a real name. That can be a nickname if you have a reasonable online presence under that name, but generally it has to identify you as an individual. So you wouldn't sign it as "xXImADogOnTheInternet86Xx", but as "Tom Forbes (orf)". And even if there won't be direct legal consequences, it'd certainly affect your ab…
Your comment would be fine without that first bit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
[flagged]
If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it. Note this one: "Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
You’d send me a contributor agreement, after I’ve contributed, to retroactively ask if I used a LLM to write the code, and if I refused you’d then sue me for nebulous ill-defined damages and for breaching a non-existent contract? So in your head, I could contribute a change that introduces a bug and as a result you could sue me for the time it took you to fix it? … Are you OK? I was hoping for something with a “I’m a…
We've actually been asking you not to do this for years. This is bad:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43121242 (Feb 2025)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23207733 (May 2020)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14362936 (May 2017)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13898229 (March 2017)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12117076 (July 2016)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12108386 (July 2016)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11864815 (June 2016)
I'm not going to ban you for this episode because everyone goes on tilt sometimes. But if you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and do what it takes to recalibrate so that you're using the site as intended going forward, we'd be grateful.