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

We will ban you and ridicule you in public if you waste our time on crap reports

curl.se

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

641–650 of 653 posts

Re: We will ban you and ridicule you in public if you waste our time on crap reports

#641

Post by BugsJustFindMe »

Arainach wrote: post #632
BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #630

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Transference doesn't matter, because exchange is not a requirement for gain. People get things merely from having prestige/influence/power all the time . It's sometimes called an award, and sometimes called tribute, and sometimes called currying favor. > you can sell the bitcoins Prestige is influence, and you can absolutely sell the use or effects of influence. > There are exchanges that declare their exact value. P…

It's been known in creative fields - including software - forever that payment in "influence" is worthless. It's been a meme for decades. http://www.fyoupay.me/

You're thinking of exposure, not influence. And the payment is what an individual agrees to. If you don't agree to doing work to gain influence, that's up to you, just like I don't agree to doing work for bitcoins or Pokémon cards.

Re: We will ban you and ridicule you in public if you waste our time on crap reports

#642

Post by leekrasnow »

hypfer wrote: post #619
burningChrome wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Years ago, I built what I thought was a pretty basic static site generator using HapiJS. I was using it for personal projects and after some convincing by friends, put it up on Github. My friends went on Reddit and posted it and then told me about it afterwards. It initially got some decent traction and then all of a sudden, all the pull requests came, all the feature requests and then all the bug reports. I kept tel…

Been there, done that, built walls. If you allow me to go on a meandering tangent/exploration: ___ I mean if you think about it, this outcome is more or less inevitable, given the environment we've created. The foundational building block being that people will always optimize for their own benefit and personal gain. They fundamentally have to, because no one else will. So that gives us a natural source of conflict,…

fantastic insight, thanks for sharing these thoughts!

Re: We will ban you and ridicule you in public if you waste our time on crap reports

#643

Post by thephyber »

ACS_Solver wrote: post #273
thephyber wrote: post #31

I am friends with a solo maintainer of a major open source project. He repeatedly complains that at the beginning of some semester, he sees a huge spike of false/unproveable security weakness reports / GutHub issues in the project. He thinks that there is a Chinese university which encourages their students to find and report software vulns as part of their coursework. They don’t seem to verify what they describe is…

Kryptos K4 seems to me like a potential candidate for AI systems to solve if they're capable of actual innovation. So far I find LLMs to be useful tools if carefully guided, but more like an IDE's refactoring feature on steroids than an actual thinking system. LLMs know (as in have training data) everything about Kryptos. The first three messages, how they were solved including failed attempts, years of Usenet / foru…

Yeah, you would suspect that the individual elements of solving K4 exist in some LLM, but so far the LLM slop answers are just very confident and very wrong.

My biggest complaint is that the users aren’t skeptical. They don’t even ask the LLM to verify if the answer it just generated matches the known hints from the puzzle artist. Beyond that, they don’t ask it to verify whether the decryption method actually yields the plaintext it confidently spit out.

I’m super impressed with Claude Code, though. For my use case, planning and building iOS app prototypes, it is amazing.

Re: We will ban you and ridicule you in public if you waste our time on crap reports

#646

Post by moraesc »

mnkv wrote: post #558
emmaviolet wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GitHub PM here working on how we can make this problem feel better for maintainers. Really appreciate how tiring this can be, especially when even low volume is sustained for many months. Would love your thoughts on some of the things we're thinking about: - Would it help to disable all PRs? All non-contributor PRs? - Would a "close as admin" button help address the issue of not wanting to be rude or discouraging? -…

My ideal is copilot that would evaluate the PR against some basic guidelines that maintainers write down. And perhaps a way to filter PRs to just contributor PRs would be easy to implement and pretty useful

Another GitHub PM here. Thanks for the feedback! We're currently working on adding a way restrict PR creation to collaborations only. We've also heard some feedback around evaluating PRs against contributing guidelines which would allow maintainers to clearly define criteria that PRs must meet, so we're exploring that option as well.

Re: We will ban you and ridicule you in public if you waste our time on crap reports

#647

Post by moraesc »

boredtofears wrote: post #494
ryandrake wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone on the other side of the PR, the current situation makes things awkward for me, too. Occasionally, I'll make an actual fix to scratch some particular itch I have with the software, and I'm hesitant to even open a PR, because it's just going to 1. pile yet another PR onto the maintainer, and 2. might get dismissed out of hand because it's mistaken for AI slop or other low-effort spam that these attackers ar…

Yeah, I kinda stopped involving myself in other people's OSS projects a while ago for that reason. If I have an itch to scratch, I just use my fork. It usually feels like my itch isn't theirs and I always feel like I'm imposing on the maintainer's vision or at best just taking time away from them. I think maintainers have a lot of pressure to accept things because "open source!".

A couple questions here - would more clear guidelines in the CONTRIBUTING.md file help in clarifying project direction and what contributions would be most valuable? Is there a better way for projects to indicate what issues should be prioritized? Do you ever want to run your contribution ideas past a maintainer before opening up a PR and if so do you ever do that? I'm curious if your itch may actually be something they're looking for too but it's not made clear in an effective way.

Re: We will ban you and ridicule you in public if you waste our time on crap reports

#648

Post by moraesc »

normie3000 wrote: post #599
emmaviolet wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GitHub PM here working on how we can make this problem feel better for maintainers. Really appreciate how tiring this can be, especially when even low volume is sustained for many months. Would love your thoughts on some of the things we're thinking about: - Would it help to disable all PRs? All non-contributor PRs? - Would a "close as admin" button help address the issue of not wanting to be rude or discouraging? -…

Good questions, thanks. I'll share this thread with other maintainers. Is this the best place for feedback in a week or two? Or is there a GitHub meta discussion somewhere?

We just posted a discussion on this topic and some solutions we're exploring: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/185387

Feel free to drop any feedback or questions in the post.

Re: We will ban you and ridicule you in public if you waste our time on crap reports

#649

Post by boredtofears »

moraesc wrote: post #647
boredtofears wrote: post #494

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I kinda stopped involving myself in other people's OSS projects a while ago for that reason. If I have an itch to scratch, I just use my fork. It usually feels like my itch isn't theirs and I always feel like I'm imposing on the maintainer's vision or at best just taking time away from them. I think maintainers have a lot of pressure to accept things because "open source!".

A couple questions here - would more clear guidelines in the CONTRIBUTING.md file help in clarifying project direction and what contributions would be most valuable? Is there a better way for projects to indicate what issues should be prioritized? Do you ever want to run your contribution ideas past a maintainer before opening up a PR and if so do you ever do that? I'm curious if your itch may actually be something t…

To be honest, I didn't really think about the goals of the projects at all. I'm not even sure if a CONTRIBUTING.md existed. I just needed a particular feature for something I was working and it felt like "being a good OSS citizen" to at least offer it back to the maintainer, but I think I just ended up putting them in a position where they felt like they had to make it work.
Post reply on HN