First of many I hope, god bless.
thank you for this truly deranged comment
Because they're for two completely different domains?
as a fan of him this rationale did not make a shred of sense "Both parties can have their preference" - this was already true of C where you can just turn enable unused variable warnings or turn them into hard errors,…
Well its also just idiotic in terms of how some huge number of people write code. I know I'll need so-and-so import, so i write it at the top of the file before i even start, I press ctrl-s and it dissapears... I…
I really don't understand why people feel the need to include this stuff. I am not saying that out of some anti-AI sentiment, i just genuinely don't understand how peoiple have so little taste as to think it adds to…
Me when I have literally no idea what im talking about
> I was a little shocked that they could get it fully working in a week to be honest It shouldn't be shocking, it was done using only compute, and the codebase is owned by the company who owns the compute, you literally…
> I think much of the world of software has become incredibly myopic. > usually taking the easy way out is just deferring the costs to your future. Problem is that those costs accrue interest. This sums up my thoughts…
sad but true
>the devil lies in the details This is true, but perhaps not uniquely so, when compared to platform dependence of the standard libary already. File semantics, sync primitive gaurantees and implementations, timers and…
>People disagree on a bunch of extremely politicized topics within the realm of nutrition and health which is famously complex and hard to understand even for experts in the field. Yup, I'm "staggered".
>We don't hire juniors and throw them boilerplate and tiny bugs while expecting them to learn along the way ad hoc Huh? This is exactly what almost everyone does
Another good example of "the people writing good code with AI are the people who could have done it regardless"
>It seems we've uncovered several feasible answers to your question of "why would you want that?" Fair enough
Right but these are bad actors, roughly speaking, so why should I expect them to disclose the fact that they're using LLMs to me? If someone is repeatedly sending me slop to look at I'll block them whether or not they…
This mirrors my thoughts.
I don't see what the "deceptive practices" would be though - you can just look at the code being submitted, there isn't really the same background truth involved as with "did the thing in this video actually happen?"…
Yep other people pointed this out as well, this makes sense to me.
Well if an agent is submitting it I'm just going to reject it, thats no problem. "Just send me the prompt".
I mean sure, in the same sense that law enforcement would be a lot easier if all the criminals just came to the police station and gave themselves up Again though, people can trivially hide the fact they used an LLM to…
The human who submitted the PR is 100% accountable either way, thats partly my point. Disclosing AI has its purposes, I agree, but its not like we can reliably get everyone to do it anyway, which also leads me to…
Sure, the point about LLM "mistakes" etc being harder to detect is valid, although I'm not entirely sure how to compare this with human hard to detect mistakes. If anything I find LLM code shortcomings often a bit…
Future analysis is a valid reason to keep it, thats a good point and I agree with that.
> I'd like to be able to review commits and see which were substantially bot-written and which were mostly human) then it's also easy. Why is this, though? I'm genuinely curious. My code-quality bar doesn't change…
First of many I hope, god bless.
thank you for this truly deranged comment
Because they're for two completely different domains?
as a fan of him this rationale did not make a shred of sense "Both parties can have their preference" - this was already true of C where you can just turn enable unused variable warnings or turn them into hard errors,…
Well its also just idiotic in terms of how some huge number of people write code. I know I'll need so-and-so import, so i write it at the top of the file before i even start, I press ctrl-s and it dissapears... I…
I really don't understand why people feel the need to include this stuff. I am not saying that out of some anti-AI sentiment, i just genuinely don't understand how peoiple have so little taste as to think it adds to…
Me when I have literally no idea what im talking about
> I was a little shocked that they could get it fully working in a week to be honest It shouldn't be shocking, it was done using only compute, and the codebase is owned by the company who owns the compute, you literally…
> I think much of the world of software has become incredibly myopic. > usually taking the easy way out is just deferring the costs to your future. Problem is that those costs accrue interest. This sums up my thoughts…
sad but true
>the devil lies in the details This is true, but perhaps not uniquely so, when compared to platform dependence of the standard libary already. File semantics, sync primitive gaurantees and implementations, timers and…
>People disagree on a bunch of extremely politicized topics within the realm of nutrition and health which is famously complex and hard to understand even for experts in the field. Yup, I'm "staggered".
>We don't hire juniors and throw them boilerplate and tiny bugs while expecting them to learn along the way ad hoc Huh? This is exactly what almost everyone does
Another good example of "the people writing good code with AI are the people who could have done it regardless"
>It seems we've uncovered several feasible answers to your question of "why would you want that?" Fair enough
Right but these are bad actors, roughly speaking, so why should I expect them to disclose the fact that they're using LLMs to me? If someone is repeatedly sending me slop to look at I'll block them whether or not they…
This mirrors my thoughts.
I don't see what the "deceptive practices" would be though - you can just look at the code being submitted, there isn't really the same background truth involved as with "did the thing in this video actually happen?"…
Yep other people pointed this out as well, this makes sense to me.
Well if an agent is submitting it I'm just going to reject it, thats no problem. "Just send me the prompt".
I mean sure, in the same sense that law enforcement would be a lot easier if all the criminals just came to the police station and gave themselves up Again though, people can trivially hide the fact they used an LLM to…
The human who submitted the PR is 100% accountable either way, thats partly my point. Disclosing AI has its purposes, I agree, but its not like we can reliably get everyone to do it anyway, which also leads me to…
Sure, the point about LLM "mistakes" etc being harder to detect is valid, although I'm not entirely sure how to compare this with human hard to detect mistakes. If anything I find LLM code shortcomings often a bit…
Future analysis is a valid reason to keep it, thats a good point and I agree with that.
> I'd like to be able to review commits and see which were substantially bot-written and which were mostly human) then it's also easy. Why is this, though? I'm genuinely curious. My code-quality bar doesn't change…