in response to someone asking about why the author name doesn't match the contributor's name. Incredible response.
AI has a deep understanding of how this code works
51–60 of 329 posts
Re: AI has a deep understanding of how this code works
#52I generally like AI coding using CC etc, but this forced me to remember that these generated code ultimately came from these stolen (spiritually, not necessarily legally) pieces.
Re: AI has a deep understanding of how this code works
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't suppose you saw the post where OP asked claude to explain why this patch was not plagiarized? It's pretty damning.
Why have the OP in the loop at all if he’s just sending prompts to AI? Surely it’s a wonderful piece of performance art.
Re: AI has a deep understanding of how this code works
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, and that may eventually lead to a more generation-friendly fork to which those desiring said friendliness, or just more features in general, will flock.
I think everyone would appreciate if these people using LLMs to spit out these PRs would fork things and "contribute" to those forks instead.
Re: AI has a deep understanding of how this code works
#55I've closed my share of AI-generated PRs on some OSS repositories I maintain. These contributors seem to jump from one project to another, until their contribution is accepted (recognized ?). I wonder how long the open-source ecosystem will be able to resist this wave. The burden of reviewing AI-generated PRs is already not sustainable for maintainers, and the number of real open-source contributors is decreasing. Si…
This PR was very successfully resisted: closed and locked without much reviewing. And with a lot of tolerance and patience from the developers, much more than I believe to be fruitful: the "author" is remarkably resistant to argument. So, I think that others can resist in the same way.
Re: AI has a deep understanding of how this code works
#56Re: AI has a deep understanding of how this code works
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think everyone would appreciate if these people using LLMs to spit out these PRs would fork things and "contribute" to those forks instead.
It's a fairly simple matter to reject a PR. And a nice-to-have if they update their contribution guidelines to reflect their preferences.
Unless, of course, it has nothing to do with actually contributing and improving software.
Re: AI has a deep understanding of how this code works
#58For the longest time, Linus's dictum "Talk is cheap. Show me the code" held. Now that's fallen! New rules for the new world are needed..
Re: AI has a deep understanding of how this code works
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
what’s stopping the author from maintaining their own fork i wonder?
Nothing! Another question though when reading his blog: is he himself full AI? as in, not even a human writing those blog posts. Reads a bit like that.
Re: AI has a deep understanding of how this code works
#60Maintainers and repo owners will get where they want to go the fastest by not referring to what/who "generated" code in a PR. Discussions about AI/LLM code being a problem solely because AI/LLM is not generally a productive conversation. Better is to critique the actual PR itself. For example, needs more tests, needs to be broken up, doesn't follow our protocols for merging/docs, etc. Additionally, if there isn't a c…
I don't suppose you saw the post where OP asked claude to explain why this patch was not plagiarized? It's pretty damning.