71–80 of 86 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's an interesting use of the word 'job'. How much is the rsync maintainer paid?
My bad, I meant profession.
AFAIK the rsync maintainer does it for free. And he mainly seems to be getting abuse in return for that service.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My bad, I meant profession.
Same issue there. A profession is an occupation that you get paid for doing. AFAIK the rsync maintainer does it for free. And he mainly seems to be getting abuse in return for that service.
Wrong, a profession is an occupation that requires specialized training or qualifications. This means one can have a profession and still not get paid.
> And he mainly seems to be getting abuse in return for that service.
What abuse you are referring to?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Same issue there. A profession is an occupation that you get paid for doing. AFAIK the rsync maintainer does it for free. And he mainly seems to be getting abuse in return for that service.
> Same issue there. A profession is an occupation that you get paid for doing. Wrong, a profession is an occupation that requires specialized training or qualifications. This means one can have a profession and still not get paid. > And he mainly seems to be getting abuse in return for that service. What abuse you are referring to?
In terms of abuse, I was thinking of this issue thread: https://github.com/RsyncProject/rsync/issues/929
What's the difference between experience a human made bug versus an AI made bug in software?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Citation needed :) That's a bold claim. May be true, but it's a bold one, so something backing it up would be nice.
Could one not simply look at the github to verify it with their own eyes? One of git's defining features is every commit being accountable
What's the difference between experience a human made bug versus an AI made bug in software?
The difference lies in the field of civic virtue. A human programmer accepts personal responsibility for the safety of the software of which he is a member, defending it, if need be, with his life. The AI does not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Same issue there. A profession is an occupation that you get paid for doing. Wrong, a profession is an occupation that requires specialized training or qualifications. This means one can have a profession and still not get paid. > And he mainly seems to be getting abuse in return for that service. What abuse you are referring to?
If you want to go down that semantic route, then being an open source maintainer clearly isn't a profession, as it requires neither specialized training nor qualifications! In terms of abuse, I was thinking of this issue thread: https://github.com/RsyncProject/rsync/issues/929
Open source software maintenance without qualifications? I hope you understand how disastrous it would be for serious software like rsync.
Looks fine? most of the commits are tests, ci, docs and issues that could cause memory corruption / hidden bugs rather than any new feature development. Of course it's unfortunate that it caused this bug to surface and it would be curious to investigate exactly why this happened, maybe the "safe" c operations have different (unexpected) behavior instead of immediately pointing out that "ai bad". I think patching issu…
Yeah this is how software development works now, no matter how much anyone wants to disagree with it. The technology is here, you can't put it back in the box. If your tool has AI agents trying to find exploits 24/7, you'll need something comparable. It is worth figuring out the new science of software engineering to get it right. I suspect we are going to find plenty of new techniques that make this sort of developm…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you want to go down that semantic route, then being an open source maintainer clearly isn't a profession, as it requires neither specialized training nor qualifications! In terms of abuse, I was thinking of this issue thread: https://github.com/RsyncProject/rsync/issues/929
> If you want to go down that semantic route, then being an open source maintainer clearly isn't a profession, as it requires neither specialized training nor qualifications! Open source software maintenance without qualifications? I hope you understand how disastrous it would be for serious software like rsync.
It might be more useful if qualifications were required before people were allowed to complain about open source software on internet message boards. That’ll be the day!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So? May main point is: Which commits actually broke the functionality? Going from 3.4.3 to 3.4.2 to test should be easy for anyone affected and would have been more helpful than this rant. I'm not defending bad slop commits, especially for such a long running project but the tribal Fediverse outrage whenever LLMs are involved is often just lazy and uninformed. To quote this PR: https://github.com/RsyncProject/rsync/i…
Figuring out which commit broke what functionality is not something you can expect users to do.