It's just matter of ethics for me. You should be honest to the reviewer that you didn't write it entirely by yourself(100% your authorship) but a chunk of it was done by AI agents.
It reinforces trust.
2,052 karma · joined January 21, 2022
It reinforces trust.
Define "working".
As in, at least it boots on your computer, despite the fact it takes a whole business day to finish loading?
Is that really good enough for you?
* Author posts patch with a manageable number of lines so maintainer doesn't gets burned out reviewing it.
* Tries to outline on the body what the patch is about and his rationale for the design decisions on the code.
* Promptly answers any maintaners questions about the line changes.
* Discloses which AI model he used to assist on the patch and how was it used.
AI slop patch:
* Submits patch with huge lines of code without explanation.
* The body is written in a self-patronizing tone with superfluous formatting that helps nothing but annoys who is looking for the actual substance of patch
* When questioned by maintainer about some line changes either goes radio silent or reply with the usual AI tone of marketin salesman.
* rarely if ever discloses AI usage.
There will always need a human on the end to check if the LLM didn't hallucinate anything on it, including manually writing the unit tests.
Either my C skills are getting rusty and that is how a C codebase normally looks like, or LLM was trained on some suspicious codebases.
Developers have their own good reasons to stick with permissive licenses. Either because they are completely selfless, or they want to help users who want to kick-start their own business selling software. Just virtuous reasons.
Every day, he sends hundreds of commits to his (most likely vibecoded) repositories of retro games recompilation.
Will just relying on AI to code everything for you, while you just review and make decisions, keep your coding skills sharp? (At worst, atrophy your manual coding skills)
It's not going to end until the opposition comes up with a competent alternative. Flavio was the worst choice they did.
But it doesn't help that the alternative far-right candidate is an extremist nutjob whose appointment for the presidential race was done for noone other than nepotism (bearing his jailed father name). That alienated alot of his voting base who wanted a more competent candidate.
It's obvious he had a personal bias with the american team working on a sonic title.
Because if you put them on balance that will be the truth.
Instead of deleting the video and owning up to his mistake, he just deactivated the comments...
When there was an issue on the motherboard, he almost always outsourced to his more tech-savy friends to fix it for him.
I only feel sorrow for the electron devs, they will have a hard time.
My only problem is its Web target is still very dull to use, with its long cold startup time and since it's all rendered into one big canvas elements, it doens't integrates well with browser native acessibility features.
It's just Apple enforcing their rules when they see fit...
Anyway, I am glad I have never owned any Apple products in my life.
They can screw themselves with their tight grip on user freedom.
It's you're using AI tool to code, obviously the tool should be given due credits on the commits, for ethics.
but in this case Microslop is branding any commits as "co-authored by Copilot", even if the user never used any AI tool.
This is blatant attempt violation of commits authorship ethics and user rights.