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

SDL bans AI-written commits

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 145 posts

Re: SDL bans AI-written commits

#51

Post by throwawayqqq11 »

ecopoesis wrote: post #41

What’s next? Are they going to forbid the use of Intellisrnse? Maybe IDEs in general? Why not just specify all contributions must be written with a steady hand and a strong magnet.

> Whats next

To show you your hyperbole: Allowing monkeys on typewriters.

LLMs are neither IDEs nor random.

I am very sceptical about iterative AI deployment too. People pretend the success threshold is vibing somethging that gets widely used, but its more than that. These one-shot solutions are not project maintenance. Answer yourself this one, could LLMs do what the linux kernel cummunity did over the same time span? This would be a good measure of success and if so, a strong argument to allow generated contributions.

Re: SDL bans AI-written commits

#52

Post by askI12 »

ecopoesis wrote: post #41

What’s next? Are they going to forbid the use of Intellisrnse? Maybe IDEs in general? Why not just specify all contributions must be written with a steady hand and a strong magnet.

What's next? Forbid cribbing from your neighbor in an exam? The audacity!

They simply don't want people like you and lose nothing.

Re: SDL bans AI-written commits

#53

Post by reactordev »

canelonesdeverd wrote: post #48
reactordev wrote: post #6

People who can wield AI properly have no use for SDL at all. It’s a library for humans to figure out platform code. AI has no such limitations.

10/10 parody, perfectly nailed the delusion.

gotta channel some of that Kai Lentit energy.

Re: SDL bans AI-written commits

#54

Post by throw5 »

raincole wrote: post #34
throw5 wrote: post #12

Why are these projects still on Github? Isn't it better to move away from Github than go through all this shenanigans? This AI slopam nonsense isn't going to stop. Github is no longer the "social network" for software dev. It's just a vehicle to shove more and more Copilot stuff. The userbase is also changing. There are vast numbers of new users on Github who have no desire to learn the architecture or culture of the…

> It's based in Europe. It's run by a non-profit The main SDL maintainer is paid by a US for-profit company, Valve. They don't necessarily share your EU = automatically good attitude. But anyway, if Codeberg really takes off it'll be flooded with AI bots as well. All popular sites will.

> The main SDL maintainer is paid by a US for-profit company, Valve. They don't necessarily share your EU = automatically good attitude.

I'm not sure how one follows from the other. I am paid by a US for-profit company. But I still think EU has done some things better. People's beliefs are not determined by the company they work for. It would be a very sad world if people couldn't think outside the bubble of their employers.

Re: SDL bans AI-written commits

#55

Post by embedding-shape »

raincole wrote: post #34
throw5 wrote: post #12

Why are these projects still on Github? Isn't it better to move away from Github than go through all this shenanigans? This AI slopam nonsense isn't going to stop. Github is no longer the "social network" for software dev. It's just a vehicle to shove more and more Copilot stuff. The userbase is also changing. There are vast numbers of new users on Github who have no desire to learn the architecture or culture of the…

> It's based in Europe. It's run by a non-profit The main SDL maintainer is paid by a US for-profit company, Valve. They don't necessarily share your EU = automatically good attitude. But anyway, if Codeberg really takes off it'll be flooded with AI bots as well. All popular sites will.

> But anyway, if Codeberg really takes off it'll be flooded with AI bots as well. All popular sites will.

History might prove me wrong on this one, but I really believe that the platforms that are pushing people to use as much LLMs as possible for everything (Microsoft-GitHub) will surely be more flooded by AI bots than the platforms that are focusing on just hosting code instead (Codeberg).

Re: SDL bans AI-written commits

#56

Post by sph »

tkel wrote: post #47
sph wrote: post #15

Good move, and a good reminder of how much of an echo chamber Hacker News is on AI matters. In here, and big tech at large, it's touted like the unavoidable future that either you adapt or you die. LLMs are always a few months away from the (u|dys)topia of never having to write code ever again. Elsewhere, especially in fields where craft and artistry are valued (i.e. game development), AI is synonym of wanting to cut…

Curious , what have you pivoted towards? A different field?

Game development, and writing small tools in the game dev space. This week I've been working on an image editing app, mostly to play with dithering algorithms and palettes, using Odin and SDL.

I mean, it's either that or I quit software development completely; it would be a shame to throw away two decades of experience in the field.

Re: SDL bans AI-written commits

#57

Post by fnimick »

sph wrote: post #15

Good move, and a good reminder of how much of an echo chamber Hacker News is on AI matters. In here, and big tech at large, it's touted like the unavoidable future that either you adapt or you die. LLMs are always a few months away from the (u|dys)topia of never having to write code ever again. Elsewhere, especially in fields where craft and artistry are valued (i.e. game development), AI is synonym of wanting to cut…

And who knows how much of that "unavoidable future" "adapt or die" rhetoric is driven by motivated actors using LLM tools to shape the conversation?

Re: SDL bans AI-written commits

#58

Post by orwin »

pelasaco wrote: post #25
sph wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go ahead, we're all still waiting for these "AI-improved" projects to appear. Meanwhile I'll keep using SDL from the official maintainers which have been working on it for decades.

> Meanwhile I'll keep using SDL from the official maintainers which have been working on it for decades. That's just Virtue signaling. "AI-improved" projects like "rewrite $FOO in rust" are popping up everywhere. I dont support it, sqlite3 being rewritten in rust makes me just sad https://turso.tech/blog/introducing-limbo-a-complete-rewrite... , but this "$PROJECT bans AI" is just ridiculous. Ideally we should try to…

I think you don't understand how tiring it is to review full-llm code. I think banning it temporarily until people calm down with AI-generated PRs is a very sane solution. If it is still the solution in 3 years, maybe you would have a point then.

I only manage 3 'new' hires and I am of the mind of banning AI usage myself despite my heavy usage (the new hires don't level up, that's my main issue now, but the reviewing loops and the shit that got through our reviews are also issues).

Re: SDL bans AI-written commits

#59

Post by tapoxi »

dtech wrote: post #46
tapoxi wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the Monkey Selfie case - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_selfie_copyright_disput... - courts decided that copyright requires a human author and a human merely setting the conditions for a copyrighted work to appear is not enough. This reasonably means AI contributions where a human has guided the AI are not subject to copyright, and thus can't be supported by a project's license.

That's quite a stretch, and untested in court. At least a monkey is an unambiguous autonomous entity. A LLM is a - heck of a complicated - piece of software, and could very well be ruled a tool like any other

I mean, aren't we all bragging about autonomous agents doing the coding for us? I don't see how that's remotely a stretch.

The legal question was "did a human author the work"?

Re: SDL bans AI-written commits

#60

Post by raincole »

pelasaco wrote: post #2

What’s the point? People will just fork it and improve it with AI anyway. In another hand, it would be an interesting experiment to watch how the original and the fork diverge over time. Especially in terms of security discoveries and feature development.

I'm pretty pro-AI, but I find it very amusing that every single time an open source project enacts no-AI policy, someone will chime in and explain how it will be outcompeted by the yes-AI version, while in reality it never happens.
Post reply on HN