Lutris maintainer use AI generated code for some time now. The maintainer also removed the co-authorship of Claude, so no one knows which code was generated by AI.
Anyway, I was suspecting that this “issue” might come up so I’ve removed the Claude co-authorship from the commits a few days ago. So good luck figuring out what’s generated and what is not.
Because you can do a lot more with it, have you ever tried coding? Before AI, if you didn’t know how to do something, it was “Ask a question on Stack Overflow, then get told this question had already been asked/answered, then get linked to a loosely related question”. Now I can ask AI all my random obscure questions.
I get being cautious around sensitive equipment like banking apps and government databases, but why would you hate LLM-generated code this much?
What I don’t get, is people’s inability to cope with their own limitations, or find their way out of problems without asking a magic box to do everything for them. Yes I have done some coding. Asking on Stack Overflow wasn’t even that bad, and eventually you could find an answer to almost anything there if you knew what you were looking for. Paging through programming books looking for answers was relatively a lot more difficult. However, both actually taught you things during the process, you made mistakes, learned, etc. The AI is teaching you nothing it’s just doing work for you. I don’t respect that, if you use it that’s you’re business but it’s not your code and not your product or whatever.
I don’t know who those people are. I coded for 20 years before LLMs, and I coped just fine.
Unless you ask it to explain things to you. Which is often required to fix the things that the AI can’t get right on its own.
How is it not my code?
An LLM cannot ever “explain” anything to anyone, because it doesn’t know anything. How are people still trusting anything these fucking things say?
Right?? It’s bizarre to me that otherwise-smart-seeming people will think they can write “explain your reasoning” to the AI and it will explain its reasoning.
Yes, it will write some fluent response that reads as an explanation of its reasoning. But you may not even be talking to the same model that wrote the original text when you get the “explanation”.
Because it’s right more often than google? I swear you AI critics aren’t actually using AI.
Agreed. Delusional mindsets stuck in 2023. I’ve never seen more entitled people before punching on FOSS devs and how they use their free time. “We need high quality, human coded FOSS programs with ZERO AI slop in them!” “Why no, I’ve never contributed to an open source project, nor do I know how to code, why do you ask?”
Forks exist, get over it.
In case you missed it, courts have ruled that works produced by AI cannot have copyright, because it was not made by a human.
You can make use of AI-generated code, but you didn’t write it. Since you can’t copyright it, it’s not your code - it’s our code, comrade.
Courts have ruled that art that was 100% generated by AI cannot be copyrighted by the AI, because the AI is not a human person.
The same courts have also ruled that works that were assisted by AI but created by a human can be copyrighted by that human.
Thankfully real life is far more nuanced than “fuck ai” allows.
I asked plenty of questions on SO and never had a bad experience. But I put quite a bit of work in. You couldn’t ask “how do i sort a list in JAVA” and get answers, you had to ask “here’s some code I’m writing <working example> and it does <x> but I think it should do <y> because <z> what’s going on?” and people gave some really nice answers. (Or you could put “how do sort list java” into web search and get a fine answer to that; it’s not like SO was the only place to ask low-effort questions.)
One of the bad things with AI is it’s soooo helpful that when I get questions now it’s like “please create a DNS entry for foo.bar.baz” and they’re asking because the AI got completely stuck on something simple (like making a request to api.github.com) and wandered up and down and eventually decided on some nonsense course of action and the developer has given up on thinking about anything.
And get the wrong answer. But you don’t know it’s wrong, because you’re not already an expert on the obscure subject.
Before AI, yes you had to learn how to do things. Why is that bad?
No, it’s right more often than google was.
If it was the wrong answer, the projects wouldn’t work, now would they?
I’m still learning how to do things, just a lot faster, thanks to this helpful tool. Why is that bad?