this post was submitted on 09 Mar 2026
323 points (93.3% liked)

Fuck AI

6579 readers
2051 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] zr0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Have bigger problems than this. If the code is reviewed and tested, I don’t care if it was written by a human or machine. Sometimes I feel like people don’t trust recording audio on tapes and praise the good old punch cards.

[–] spartanatreyu@programming.dev 12 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

If the code is reviewed and tested, I don’t care if it was written by a human or machine.

That's a pretty big assumption there buddy.

If they didn't care enough to write the code, what makes you think they cared enough to review or test the code?

[–] x1gma@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

If they didn't care enough to write the code, what makes you think they cared enough to review or test the code?

Contributors =/= Maintainers.

[–] TootSweet@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

If the maintainers didn't care enough to summarily reject anything AI-generated out of hand, what makes you think they cared enough to review or test the code?

[–] x1gma@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

You're dropping assumptions, and nothing more. Why do you think they asked for disclosure of AI usage? People are gonna use it anyway, officially or not. They did this call for this so that it can be reviewed properly.

[–] Zos_Kia@jlai.lu 0 points 3 weeks ago

Maybe the maintainers care enough about their project to not summarily reject anything if it can help. Do you believe they are not able or willing to read the content of a PR, as they have done for the last 40 years, and determine for themselves whether the code is quality or not ?

Seriously you're out there sat on your ass throwing shade on people who donate a chunk of their time to contribute to a project used by millions. Have you done the legwork ? Cause they sure have. Have you checked the PRs ? Care to report about what you found ?

[–] tangonov@lemmy.ca 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Mostly because AI isn't capable of doing a perfectly good job without humans at this point. Vim may have started using AI as part of the development toolchain so that tired people working in their free time for free can propel their own work. To me this was always going to happen whether it gets committed discreetly or not. I don't think people will tolerate it if these commits hurt the long term, reputable stability of Vim.

We can stop pretending that AI isn't used discreetly in many and perhaps eventually all the projects that we love. Intolerance and toxic harping on open source is still the bigger problem

[–] yabbadabaddon@lemmy.zip 0 points 3 weeks ago

Did you use a GPS once in your life?

[–] zr0@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

You’re way quicker manually reviewing code compared to setting up everything just so that an LLM agent could do that. Additionally, it is open source. Literally nothing gives you any guarantees that the software will work in the first place. If you are scared of that, commercial products are your choice.

[–] spartanatreyu@programming.dev 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

You’re way quicker manually reviewing code compared to setting up everything just so that an LLM agent could do that.

Not only that, you're better off reviewing the code manually so you understand how everything works.

If you understand how things work, you can plan things out.

If you don't, you'll end up painting yourself into a corner.

If you are scared of that, commercial products are your choice.

Commercial products are not a panacea for bad software quality.

Code openness and code quality are independent, orthogonal axes.