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

Stop Slopware

stopslopware.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 171 posts

Re: Stop Slopware

#61

Post by yuriks »

dreadnip wrote: post #57
ToucanLoucan wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If AI tools produced good code that was well-designed, nobody would fucking care. Maintainers of repos want good submissions that solve issues, they don't care if you wrote it on a notepad first or generated it in 5 minutes, if it fixes the thing, and is of good quality, it would be accepted. AI submissions are getting hate because the code isn't good and isn't designed well and the person submitting it would also kn…

Using Claude to submit PRs to huge open source projects is stupid, for sure. But if I need a quick tool, like a secret Santa name picker, I’ll just have Claude build it, push it to a repo, link the repo on some PaaS and have a working, deployed app in 20 minutes. No ads, no accounts & no signing up to random websites. I can build it exactly like I want it and include fun Easter eggs for my family. Building it myself…

People aren't complaining about that. What you do in the privacy of your own computer is only your problem. The issue is people pouring a whole "arduous" 2 hours into vibecoding a project, then advertising it and posting to communities everywhere as a revolutionary bullet-proof high-quality project asking for visibility and contributions.

Re: Stop Slopware

#63

Post by indigodaddy »

raincole wrote: post #58
TheAceOfHearts wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It cannot be understated how much of a boon AI-assisted programming has been for getting stuff up and running. Once you get past the initial hurdle of setting up an environment along with any boilerplate, you can actually start running code and iterating in order to figure out how something works. Cognitive bandwidth is limited, and if you need to fully understand and get through 10 different errors before anything w…

> It cannot be understated You mean it cannot be overstated ?

You got ‘em!!

Re: Stop Slopware

#64

Post by happytoexplain »

mpalmer wrote: post #29

You can't be serious. > When you publish something under the banner of open–source, you implicitly enter a stewardship role. You’re not just shipping files, you’re making a contribution to a shared commons. That carries certain responsibilities: clarity about purpose, honesty about limitations, and a basic alignment with the community’s collaborative ethos. (from the second link) You're not just writing angry screeds…

I can't tell what you're referring to. The quote reads well.

Re: Stop Slopware

#65

Post by happytoexplain »

oofbey wrote: post #47
fschuett wrote: post #17

[flagged]

This attitude is of course very common and I just don’t understand it. Like when I read news from the other political party - it’s just confusing to me. Are they scared for their jobs? Angry that their hard earned skills are getting devalued? Genuinely concerned about copyright violations in LLM training? Or just don’t want the world to change? (Kids get off my lawn!)

The site describes a specific subset of issues very tersely. Can't you simply disagree with those, rather than imply they are never stated?

Regardless, what's confusing about the list of problems you gave? Are you implying they are somehow un-real in all contexts? The reference to political news is also confusing.

Re: Stop Slopware

#66

Post by sixtyj »

nartho wrote: post #46
fschuett wrote: post #17

[flagged]

This is a bit more complex that you make it sound, and I'm wondering this is on purpose. - Submission based magazines, who pay their writers, like Clarkesworld for example, are being flooded with LLM generated submissions. Those have been automated by people who hit every magazines multiple times with the hope that one makes it through and make a few bucks. This made the work of reviewer absolute hell, their volume o…

It would help if the form included a mandatory checkbox stating, "As the author, I declare that I created the submitted work myself without the use of AI." The terms and conditions would state that authors would be banned forever if it was discovered that they had lied.

Re: Stop Slopware

#67

Post by tonymet »

wibbily wrote: post #55

It bothers me that so many programmers I know, here and in real life, seem to never actually have cared about the craft of software development? Just about solving problems. I like problem solving too. But I also like theory and craft, and in my naïveté I assumed most of us were like me. LLMs divorced craft-programming from tool-programming and now it seems like there were never any craft-programmers at all. It feels…

There’s room for both types of people in any trade. Some photographers obsess over the equipment, some only care about the photos. Carpenters with tools. Musicians with instruments & gear. Every craft has people who care about the how and those who focus on the product.

I’ve always enjoyed the craft of software engineering, though even I admit the culture around it can be a bit overly contemplative .

Nevertheless, there is room for both personalities. Just hang out with likeminded people and ignore the rest.

Re: Stop Slopware

#68

Post by oofbey »

happytoexplain wrote: post #65
oofbey wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This attitude is of course very common and I just don’t understand it. Like when I read news from the other political party - it’s just confusing to me. Are they scared for their jobs? Angry that their hard earned skills are getting devalued? Genuinely concerned about copyright violations in LLM training? Or just don’t want the world to change? (Kids get off my lawn!)

The site describes a specific subset of issues very tersely. Can't you simply disagree with those, rather than imply they are never stated? Regardless, what's confusing about the list of problems you gave? Are you implying they are somehow un-real in all contexts? The reference to political news is also confusing.

I don't read "specific issues" so much as generalized complaints and implied insults. "Low effort" is not a specific issue - it's just derogatory. "Cut the clutter" is not useful advice. All of it sounds like "code better".

The list of proposed motivations I gave are hypotheticals. I don't understand which if any of these apply to the people who agree with the sentiment in "Stop Slopware". It sounds like maybe you do. Which of these resonate with you?

Re: Stop Slopware

#69

Post by pbalau »

> keep the commons clean [from the second link]

A glance at the r/python will show that almost every week there is a new pypi package generated by ai, with dubious utility.

I did a quick research using bigquery-public-data.pypi.distribution_metadata and out of 844719 package, 126527 have only 1 release, almost 15%.

While is not unfathomable that a chunk of those really only needed one release and/or were manually written, the number is too high. And pypi is struggling for resources.

I wonder how much crap there is on github and I think this is an even larger issue, with the new versions of LLMs being trained on crap generated by older versions.

Re: Stop Slopware

#70

Post by throwaway613745 »

Larrikin wrote: post #10

Why would any actual software engineer be against slopware? When it inevitably all comes crashing down because there was no actual software architecture or understanding of the code, someone will have to come in to make the actual product. Hopefully by then we will have realistic expectations for the LLM, have skilled up, and we as a community treat them as just another feature in the IDE.

New job title: “vibe coding cleanup specialist”
Post reply on HN