Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. in which AI coding advocates are the whiniest goddamn assholes

in which AI coding advocates are the whiniest goddamn assholes

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
9 Posts 8 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • davidgerard@circumstances.runD This user is from outside of this forum
    davidgerard@circumstances.runD This user is from outside of this forum
    davidgerard@circumstances.run
    wrote last edited by
    #1

    in which AI coding advocates are the whiniest goddamn assholes

    Link Preview Image
    Contributor Poker and Zig's AI Ban

    105 comments

    favicon

    Lobsters (lobste.rs)

    david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD ratsnakegames@mastodon.socialR danielleigh@mastodon.socialD midnightspire@mastodon.gamedev.placeM paco@infosec.exchangeP 6 Replies Last reply
    0
    • davidgerard@circumstances.runD davidgerard@circumstances.run

      in which AI coding advocates are the whiniest goddamn assholes

      Link Preview Image
      Contributor Poker and Zig's AI Ban

      105 comments

      favicon

      Lobsters (lobste.rs)

      david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
      david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD This user is from outside of this forum
      david_chisnall@infosec.exchange
      wrote last edited by
      #2

      @davidgerard

      But 90% of the top performers* are LLM users!

      * Measures by LoC changes, I guess?

      dysfun@social.treehouse.systemsD 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • davidgerard@circumstances.runD davidgerard@circumstances.run

        in which AI coding advocates are the whiniest goddamn assholes

        Link Preview Image
        Contributor Poker and Zig's AI Ban

        105 comments

        favicon

        Lobsters (lobste.rs)

        ratsnakegames@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
        ratsnakegames@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
        ratsnakegames@mastodon.social
        wrote last edited by
        #3

        @davidgerard what else is new?

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • david_chisnall@infosec.exchangeD david_chisnall@infosec.exchange

          @davidgerard

          But 90% of the top performers* are LLM users!

          * Measures by LoC changes, I guess?

          dysfun@social.treehouse.systemsD This user is from outside of this forum
          dysfun@social.treehouse.systemsD This user is from outside of this forum
          dysfun@social.treehouse.systems
          wrote last edited by
          #4

          @david_chisnall @davidgerard ah great minds https://social.treehouse.systems/@dysfun/116498990457494762

          toerror@mastodon.gamedev.placeT 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • davidgerard@circumstances.runD davidgerard@circumstances.run

            in which AI coding advocates are the whiniest goddamn assholes

            Link Preview Image
            Contributor Poker and Zig's AI Ban

            105 comments

            favicon

            Lobsters (lobste.rs)

            danielleigh@mastodon.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
            danielleigh@mastodon.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
            danielleigh@mastodon.social
            wrote last edited by
            #5

            @davidgerard I love how the thread is everyone else being reasonable, and _one guy_ being unable to admit there could be a reason to ban LLMs.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • dysfun@social.treehouse.systemsD dysfun@social.treehouse.systems

              @david_chisnall @davidgerard ah great minds https://social.treehouse.systems/@dysfun/116498990457494762

              toerror@mastodon.gamedev.placeT This user is from outside of this forum
              toerror@mastodon.gamedev.placeT This user is from outside of this forum
              toerror@mastodon.gamedev.place
              wrote last edited by
              #6

              @dysfun @david_chisnall @davidgerard Huh... Used to be by salary.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • davidgerard@circumstances.runD davidgerard@circumstances.run

                in which AI coding advocates are the whiniest goddamn assholes

                Link Preview Image
                Contributor Poker and Zig's AI Ban

                105 comments

                favicon

                Lobsters (lobste.rs)

                midnightspire@mastodon.gamedev.placeM This user is from outside of this forum
                midnightspire@mastodon.gamedev.placeM This user is from outside of this forum
                midnightspire@mastodon.gamedev.place
                wrote last edited by
                #7

                @davidgerard "If we assume that LLMs are fucking awesome, then banning them is dumb, QED"

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • davidgerard@circumstances.runD davidgerard@circumstances.run

                  in which AI coding advocates are the whiniest goddamn assholes

                  Link Preview Image
                  Contributor Poker and Zig's AI Ban

                  105 comments

                  favicon

                  Lobsters (lobste.rs)

                  paco@infosec.exchangeP This user is from outside of this forum
                  paco@infosec.exchangeP This user is from outside of this forum
                  paco@infosec.exchange
                  wrote last edited by
                  #8

                  @davidgerard
                  LLM Enthusiast: “I believe the top performers are overwhelmingly using LLMs.”

                  Author: “our experience with triaging PRs pre-LLM ban does not match your assumption at all.”

                  Enthusiast: “I don't understand how you'd be able to tell.”

                  Never let someone else’s competence get in the way of your confidence.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  1
                  0
                  • R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
                  • davidgerard@circumstances.runD davidgerard@circumstances.run

                    in which AI coding advocates are the whiniest goddamn assholes

                    Link Preview Image
                    Contributor Poker and Zig's AI Ban

                    105 comments

                    favicon

                    Lobsters (lobste.rs)

                    paco@infosec.exchangeP This user is from outside of this forum
                    paco@infosec.exchangeP This user is from outside of this forum
                    paco@infosec.exchange
                    wrote last edited by
                    #9

                    Why did you make me read this, @davidgerard !?

                    This position winds me up:
                    “I don't mean that it's important to consider the possibility that 100% of good contributions are LLM-assissted. I'm saying that we don't know the actual number and the blog post doesn't address it at all.”

                    This is a bullshit argument. When someone says the numbers aren’t good enough for them, can they articulate what numbers WOULD be good enough? What numbers would the project need to post in order to have their argument pass this person’s arbitrary muster? We can simulate numbers. We can imagine X contributions, Y% LLM, Z% good, etc. But this person wants the LLM-banning project to do all that work, publish the numbers to this person’s satisfaction, and take feedback.

                    I guess I’m saying if “the actual number” really makes the difference, the person can make a synthetic argument using dummy numbers to make the point. They can establish a methodology where all you have to do is put in the real numbers and a 👍 or 👎 pops out. They don’t. They just whine that the author didn’t do what they think they want.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    1
                    0
                    Reply
                    • Reply as topic
                    Log in to reply
                    • Oldest to Newest
                    • Newest to Oldest
                    • Most Votes


                    • Login

                    • Login or register to search.
                    • First post
                      Last post
                    0
                    • Categories
                    • Recent
                    • Tags
                    • Popular
                    • World
                    • Users
                    • Groups