Thread

1. eugenekolo · 1789571185 · focus · HN ↗

   Hobby groups projects like this are less fun for a lot of people who used to enjoy interacting with smart people. It's definitely become a game of just spam claude for answers with zero understanding or care for how anything actually works. That's fine to get things done and fine for a lot of side projects, but it definitely ruins the joy that people have in understanding systems and working with intellectuals.

   1. aeonflux · 1789572026 · focus · HN ↗

      > Hobby groups projects like this are less fun for a lot of people who used to enjoy interacting with smart people.

      Same thing did happen to many work places. People at all levels proxy questions through LLMs and don't even bother to read/trim/edit the response.

      Funny, how suddenly a tight, 1-2 sentence response on point is a sign of skill.

      1. misterderpie · 1789572549 · focus · HN ↗

         Wasn't there an article here, or was it under another HN post as a comment? Someone pointed out that the before the dawn of LLMs, "bad contributors" had a rate limiter of sorts. Now anyone can prompt their LLM and throw their output at you, shifting the burden entirely on the reviewer at highest possible speed.

         1. PunchyHamster · 1789574311 · focus · HN ↗

            It's so much worse than just that. Because they will also decide on how problem should be solved by prompting LLM and ask you to argument doing it any other way vs the LLM slop they pasted

            1. Muromec · 1789575444 · focus · HN ↗

               It which point you reject the PR and suggest them to maintain a fork themselves.

               1. Brian_K_White · 1789580113 · focus · HN ↗

                  I'd say don't bother suggesting anything.

                  Not as a rule for all prs you want to reject, but any time it seems to be no-effort pure ai. Both to waste as little of your own time and effort as possible, but also to to help make this activity not rewarding.

                  I wouldn't worry about false positives and being unfair. This is self defense and also community defense. Anyone legit will manage to get your attention. You'd be filtering not on any specific detail or rule but on simply "care".

                  If a legit person fails to convince you that they are a human that cares, then that's just an unfortunate industrial accident. It's unfortunate but trying to do anything about it is worse.

                  Besides, any actual adult understands that if they can't prove their age right now, then they can't buy a drink right now, even though they normally have that right, and is never the one trying to cry about the travesty of justice at being denied. If I submit a pr that fails your ai sniff test, I get it and don't think you're abusing me. I can try harder and we can be friends later no problem at all.

                  1. Muromec · 1789601829 · focus · HN ↗

                     I put something like that right into AGENTS.md in one of my open source repositories -- disclose the usage of AI (it's super obvious anyway) and be prepared to act on review comments, otherwise the PR is closed and submitted could be banned depending on my mood. And I only got like 3 PRs before I put it.

                     Those weren't even that bad code-wise, some have uncovered realy problems, but I ended up asking /my/ LLM to ponytail them into shape, because the submitter didn't bother.

            2. IAmBroom · 1789580299 · focus · HN ↗

               Quasi-sealioning.

               <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;search?q=sealioning" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;search?q=sealioning

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.