Same concept, but github repos now.
We’ve had low quality code for as long as we’ve had programmable machines. I’ve seen a lot of manually written bad code well before LLMs took over. Nowadays, I primarily look at how long a repo has been around and how active it is. A repo that has consistent activity is probably going to be a higher quality one. Even better if I can follow PRs to see how the code base is evolving.
I will admit it’s become more difficult to tell low quality git repos from higher quality ones. Missing files or incomplete README files are a thing of the past. Claude is very good at filling in the gaps to make all repos at least appear respectable.
I appreciate the effort. May I ask how do you tackle this?
But now other people's code is just a starting point for me forking an app to do exactly what I want it to - it's inspiration because code is cheap.
Of course for larger projects we will still need solid components underlying them, but what you're really talking about is just maturity - it's very easy to produce a lot of output now but you can't replace actual history or having more then exactly 1 maintainer.
Jokes aside, Opus 5.5 and Fable 5.1 are on another level. I was recently vibe coding an app, and after three days of prompting or so: sigh “I need to bite the bullet, and finally face the slop” — I started to read the code, and to my surprise, it was adequate. Not an amazing code, not a slop either.
I cleaned it up in one session. 50k LoC of Golang. Although even language is less important nowadays. People make DSL, and LLMs immediately start programming on this DSL.