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

We need a clearer framework for AI-assisted contributions to open source

samsaffron.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 161 posts

Re: We need a clearer framework for AI-assisted contributions to open source

#71

Post by keiferski »

darkwater wrote: post #16

The title doesn't make justice to the content. I really liked the paragraph about LLMs being "alien intelligence" > Many engineers I know fall into 2 camps, either the camp that find the new class of LLMs intelligent, groundbreaking and shockingly good. In the other camp are engineers that think of all LLM generated content as “the emperor’s new clothes”, the code they generate is “naked”, fundamentally flawed and po…

This is why at a fundamental level, the concept of AGI doesn't make a lot of sense. You can't measure machine intelligence by comparing it to a human's. That doesn't mean machines can't be intelligent...but rather that the measuring stick cannot be an abstracted human being. It can only be the accumulation of specific tasks.

Re: We need a clearer framework for AI-assisted contributions to open source

#72

Post by catigula »

softwaredoug wrote: post #11

Anyone else feel like we're cresting the LLM coding hype curve? Like a recognition that there's value there, but we're passing the frothing-at-the-mouth stage of replacing all software engineers?

It's been less than a year and agents have gone from patently useless to very useful if used well.

Re: We need a clearer framework for AI-assisted contributions to open source

#73

Post by NewsaHackO »

jandrese wrote: post #52
softwaredoug wrote: post #11

Anyone else feel like we're cresting the LLM coding hype curve? Like a recognition that there's value there, but we're passing the frothing-at-the-mouth stage of replacing all software engineers?

When people talk about the “AI bubble popping” this is what they mean. It is clear that AI will remain useful, but the “singularity is nigh” hype is faltering and the company valuations based on perpetual exponential improvement are just not realistic. Worse, the marginal improvements are coming at ever higher resource requirements with each generation, which puts a soft cap on how good an AI can be and still be econ…

>When people talk about the “AI bubble popping” this is what they mean.

You mean what they have conceded so far to be what they mean. Every new model they start to see that they have to give up a little more.

Re: We need a clearer framework for AI-assisted contributions to open source

#74

Post by jsty »

andy99 wrote: post #69

This is a problem everywhere now, and not just in code. It now takes zero effort to produce something, whether code or a work plan or “deep research” and then lob it over the fence, expecting people to review and act upon it. It’s an extension of the asymmetric bullshit principle IMO, and I think now all workplaces / projects need norms about this.

It feels like reputation / identity are about to become far more critical in determining whether your contribution, of whatever form, even gets considered.

Re: We need a clearer framework for AI-assisted contributions to open source

#75

Post by jongjong »

2 months ago, after I started using Claude Code on my side project, within the space of days, I went from not allowing a single line of AI code into my codebase to almost 100% AI-written code. It basically codes in my exact style and I know ahead of time what code I expect to see so reviewing is really easy.

I cannot justify to myself writing code by hand when there is literally no difference in the output from how I would have done it myself. It might as well be reading my mind, that's what it feels like.

For me, vibe coding is essentially a 5x speed increase with no downside. I cannot believe how fast I can churn out features. All the stuff I used to type out by hand now seems impossibly boring. I just don't have the patience to hand-code anymore.

I've stuck to vanilla JavaScript because I don't have the patience to wait for the TypeScript transpiler. TS iteration speed is too slow. By the time it finishes transpiling, I can't even remember what I was trying to do. So you bet I don't have the patience to write by hand now. I really need momentum (fast iteration speed) when I code and LLMs provide that.

Re: We need a clearer framework for AI-assisted contributions to open source

#76

Post by miningape »

softskunk wrote: post #20
Toby1VC wrote: post #13

Nice jewish word mostly meant to mock. Why would I care what a plugin that I don't even see in use has to say to my face (since I had to read this with all the interpretation potential and receptiveness available). The same kind of inserted judgment that lingers similar to "Yes, I will judge you if you use AI".

There’s nothing wrong with judgment. Judging someone’s character based on whether they use generative “AI” is a valid practice. You may not like being judged, but that’s another matter entirely.

Yep, if you churn out a bad change - AI or not - I'm going to be more careful with reviewing what you put out*. This is judgement, and it is a good thing - it helps us prioritise what is worth doing, and how much time should be spent on it.

If your attitude is consistently "idk the AI made it" and you refuse to review it yourself. For 1, I am insulted that you think I should pick up your slack, and 2, I'm going to judge you and everything you put out even more harshly - for my own sanity, and trying to keep debt under control.

Judgement isn't a bad thing, it's how we decide good from bad. Pretending that it is because it uniquely discriminates against bad practise only proves to me that it's worth doubling down on that judgement.

* - I won't necessarily say/do anything different, but I am more careful - and I do start to look for patterns / ways to help.

Re: We need a clearer framework for AI-assisted contributions to open source

#77

Post by zdragnar »

sgarland wrote: post #38
andai wrote: post #29

>That said, there is a trend among many developers of banning AI. Some go so far as to say “AI not welcome here” find another project. >This feels extremely counterproductive and fundamentally unenforceable to me. Much of the code AI generates is indistinguishable from human code anyway. You can usually tell a prototype that is pretending to be a human PR, but a real PR a human makes with AI assistance can be indisti…

> I guess the problem is there's no way of knowing that? Is there a Proof of Work for code review? In a live setting, you could ask the submitter to explain various parts of the code. Async, that doesn’t work, because presumably someone who used AI without disclosing that would do the same for the explanation.

Based on interviews I've run, people who use AI heavily have no problem also using it during a live conversation to do their thinking for them there, too.

Re: We need a clearer framework for AI-assisted contributions to open source

#78

Post by quxbar »

If one claims to be able to write good code with LLMs, it should just as easy to write comprehensive e2e tests. If you don't hold your code to a high testing standard than you were always going off 'vibes' whether they were from a silicon neural network or your human meatware biases.

Re: We need a clearer framework for AI-assisted contributions to open source

#79

Post by reedlaw »

darkwater wrote: post #16

The title doesn't make justice to the content. I really liked the paragraph about LLMs being "alien intelligence" > Many engineers I know fall into 2 camps, either the camp that find the new class of LLMs intelligent, groundbreaking and shockingly good. In the other camp are engineers that think of all LLM generated content as “the emperor’s new clothes”, the code they generate is “naked”, fundamentally flawed and po…

Isn't the intelligence of every other person alien to ourselves? The article ends with a need to "protect our own engineering brands" but how is that communicated? I found this [https://meta.discourse.org/t/contributing-to-discourse-devel...] which seems woefully inadequate. In practice, conventions are communicated through existing code. Are human contributors capable of grasping an "engineering brand" by working on a few PRs?

Re: We need a clearer framework for AI-assisted contributions to open source

#80

Post by throwawaysoxjje »

DerThorsten wrote: post #44
lapcat wrote: post #43

> That said it is a living demo that can help make an idea feel more real. It is also enormously fun. Think of it as a delightful movie set. [pedantry] It bothers me that the photo for "think of prototype PRs as movie sets" is clearly not a movie set but rather the set of the TV show Seinfeld. Anyone who watched the show would immediately recognize Jerry's apartment.

Its not the set of the TV show I beliefe, but a recreation. https://nypost.com/2015/06/23/you-can-now-visit-the-iconic-s... It looks a bit different wrt. the stuff on the fridge and the items in the cupboard

It’s this Sony Picture Studios recreation actually:

https://www.reddit.com/r/seinfeld/comments/yfbmn2/sony_pictu...

Post reply on HN