‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

Pop!_OS bans AI-generated code from much of its codebase

116 points · 167 comments · bundie

  1. lkramer · · focus · HN ↗
    I had a PR in flight that got closed because of this. I had an issue with passwords in the network applet for the VPN and had used Claude to help me identify and then come up with a fix. I did spend a lot time handcrafting and making sure the quality was good, but I respect their decision and no hard feelings, but as someone who have struggled to find time and opportunity to contribute to open source it was a small set back.
    1. sedan_baklazhan · · focus · HN ↗
      What is actually the meaning of “handcrafting” here?
      1. throwaway74628 · · focus · HN ↗
        My guess: taking personal responsibility for the functionality, readability, and sanity of the change proposed, both atomically and in the context of the wider code base (adhering to existing conventions and patterns), to the best of the author’s ability.
        1. thereisno · · focus · HN ↗
          "taking responsibility" doesn't actually mean anything, it's just empty words
          1. simonra · · focus · HN ↗
            Putting any specific string in an "author(s)" or "committer" field is likewise a token gesture that doesn't affect or alter the content. The impact, just like promises of responsibility, would still solely be in biasing the reader, clouding the evaluation.

            Unless you believe there is substance in social interactions over time, like trust. But then it would be a socially weird move to dismiss promises of responsibility out of hand instead of picking up the invitation to build trust if that's what's perceived to be lacking.

          2. throwaway74628 · · focus · HN ↗
            We are not the same.
      2. lkramer · · focus · HN ↗
        What I meant by it was that I read every line of code generated, made sure I understood its purpose and either manually rewrote it if I felt there was a better way or asked Claude to do it. E.g. there was a bug where the password could end up in a configuration labelled as a username. Claude's initial fix was to simply exclude 'username' in a for loop, but I asked it to find examples in similar code in other codebases to see what the best practice was and ended up basing to fix on what is done in Gnome.
        1. sedan_baklazhan · · focus · HN ↗
          Can you show the PR?
Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.