←back to thread

258 points signa11 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
christina97 ◴[] No.42732390[source]
> A major project will discover that it has merged a lot of AI-generated code, a fact that may become evident when it becomes clear that the alleged author does not actually understand what the code does.

Not to detract from this point, but I don’t think I understand what half the code I have written does if it’s been more than a month since I wrote it…

replies(6): >>42732523 #>>42733051 #>>42733163 #>>42733942 #>>42734578 #>>42734654 #
WaitWaitWha ◴[] No.42732523[source]
I am confident that you do understand it at time of writing.

> We depend on our developers to contribute their own work and to stand behind it; large language models cannot do that. A project that discovers such code in its repository may face the unpleasant prospect of reverting significant changes.

At time of writing and commit, I am certain you "stand behind" your code. I think the author refers to the new script kiddies of the AI time. Many do not understand what the AI spits out at time of copy/paste.

replies(1): >>42732777 #
ozim ◴[] No.42732777[source]
Sounds a lot like bashing copy pasting from StackOverflow. So also like old argument “kids these days”.

No reasonable company pipes stuff directly to prod you still have some code review an d QA. So doesn’t matter if you copy from SO without understanding or LLM generates code that you don’t understand.

Both are bad but still happen and world didn’t crash.

replies(4): >>42732862 #>>42734024 #>>42734026 #>>42734792 #
1. thayne ◴[] No.42734792[source]
It's not very common for people to do drive-by pull requests that just copy code from Stack Overflow on open source projects. I've already started seeing that with LLM generated code. And yeah, hopefully the problems with it are caught, but it wastes the maintainers time and drives maintainer Burnout.