Define policy forbidding use of AI code generators

I don't think anyone is claiming that. If you submit changes to a FOSS project and an LLM assisted you in writing them how would anyone know? Assuming at least that you are an otherwise competent developer and that you carefully review all code before you commit it.

The (admittedly still controversial) claim being made is that developers with LLM assistance are more productive than those without. Further, that there is little incentive for such developers to advertise this assistance. Less trouble for all involved to represent it as 100% your own unassisted work.

AI “assistance” is a short intermediate phase, like the “centaurs” that Garry Kasparov was very fond of (human + computer beat both a human and a computer by itself… until the computer-only became better).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_chess

Was your comment tongue-in-cheek? If not, where is this huge mass of AI-generated software?

Admitting such is like admitting you are overpaid for your job, and that a 20 USD AI-agent can do better and faster than you for 75% of the work.

Is it easy to admit that you have learnt skills for 10+ years that are progressively already getting replaced by a machine ? (like thousands of jobs in the past).

More and more, developer is going to be a monkey job where your only task is to make sure there is enough coal in the steam machine.

Compilers destroyed the jobs of developers writing assembler code, they had to adapt. They insisted that hand-written assembler was better.

Here is the same, except you write code in natural language. It may not be optimal in all situations but it often gets the job done.

The most recent release includes a MacOS build in a dmg signed by Apple: https://github.com/banagale/FileKitty/releases/tag/v0.2.3

I vibed that workflow just so more people could have access to this tool. It was a pain and it actually took time away from toenail clipping.

And while I didn't lay hands on a guitar much during this period, I did manage to build this while bouncing between playing Civil War tunes on a 3D-printed violin and generating music in Suno for a soundtrack to “Back on That Crust,” the missing and one true spiritual successor to ToeJam & Earl: https://suno.com/song/e5b6dc04-ffab-4310-b9ef-815bdf742ecb

https://github.com/TeMPOraL/qr-code-generator

Built with Aider and either Sonnet 3.5 or Gemini 2.5 Pro (I forgot to note that down in this project), and recently modified with Claude Code because I had to test it on something.

Getting the first version of this up was literally both faster and easier than finding a QR code generator that I'm sure is not bloated, not bullshit, not loaded with trackers, that's not using shorteners or its own URL (it's always a stupid idea to use URL shorteners you don't control), not showing ads, mining bitcoin and shit, one that my wife can use in her workflow without being distracted too much. Static page, domain I own, a bit of fiddling with LLMs.

What I can't link to is half a dozen single-use tools or faux tools created on the fly as part of working on something. But this happens to me couple times a month.

To anchor another vertex in this parameter space, I found it easier and faster to ask LLM to build me a "breathing timer" (one that counts down N seconds and resets, repeatedly) with analog indicator by requesting it, because a search query to Google/Kagi would be of comparable length, and then I'd have to click on results!

EDIT: Okay, another example:

https://github.com/TeMPOraL/tampermonkey-scripts/blob/master...

It overlays a trivial UI to set up looping over a segment of any YouTube video, and automatically persists the setting by video ID. It solves the trivial annoyance of channel jingles and other bullshit at start/end of videos that I use repeatedly as background music.

This was mostly done zero-shot by Claude, with maybe two or three requests for corrections/extra features, total development time maybe 15 minutes. I use it every day all the time ever since.

You could say, "but SponsorBlock" or whatever, but per what GP wrote, I just needed a small fraction of functionality of the tools I know exist, and it was trivial to generate that with AI.

OK, but I asked for evidence and people just keep not providing any.

"God is all around you; he just works in mysterious ways"

OK, good luck with that.

https://github.com/neocotic/qrious

All the hard work was made by humans.

I can do `npm install` without having to pay for AI, thanks.

  Real musicians don’t mix loops they bought.
  Real musicians make their own synth patches.
  Real musicians build their own instruments.
  Real musicians hand-forge every metal component in their instruments.
  …
  They say real musicians raise goats for the leather for the drum-skins, but I wouldn't know because I haven’t made any music in months and the goats smell funny.

1) even though most of people on here know what npm is, many of us are not web developers and don't really know how to turn a random package into a useful webapp.

2) The AI is faster than googling a finished product that already exists, not just as an NPM package, but as a complete website.

Especially because search results require you to go through all the popups everyone stuffs everywhere because cookies, ads, before you even find out if it was actually a scam where the website you went to first doesn't actually do the right thing (or perhaps *anything*) anyway.

It is also, for many of us, the same price: free.

Also a sufficiently good exponential solver would do the same thing.

You only need to search for “loops goat skin”. You’re butchering the quote and its meaning quite a bit. The widely circulated version is:

> I thought using loops was cheating, so I programmed my own using samples. I then thought using samples was cheating, so I recorded real drums. I then thought that programming it was cheating, so I learned to play drums for real. I then thought using bought drums was cheating, so I learned to make my own. I then thought using premade skins was cheating, so I killed a goat and skinned it. I then thought that that was cheating too, so I grew my own goat from a baby goat. I also think that is cheating, but I’m not sure where to go from here. I haven’t made any music lately, what with the goat farming and all.

It’s not about “real musicians”¹ but a personal reflection on dependencies and abstractions and the nature of creative work and remixing. Your interpretation of it is backwards.

¹ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

I am sorry, none of your points are made. Makes no sense.

The LLM work sounds dumb, and the suggestion that it made "a qr code generator" is disingenuous. The LLM barely did a frontend for it. Barely.

Regarding the "free" price, read the comment I replied on again:

> Built with Aider and either Sonnet 3.5 or Gemini 2.5 Pro

Paid tools.

It sounds like the author payed for `npm install`, and thinks he's on top of things and being smart.

By their own admission, this is just kind of OK. They don’t even know how good or bad it is, just that it kind of solved an immediate problem. That’s not how you create sustainable and reliable software. Which is OK, sometimes you just need to crap something out to do a quick job, but that doesn’t really feel like what your parent comment is talking about.

That is a big assumption. If everyone were doing that, this wouldn’t be a major issue. But as the curl developer has noted, people are using LLMs without thinking and wasting everyone’s time and resources.

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/danielstenberg_hackerone-curl...

I can attest to that. Just the other day I got a bug report, clearly written with the assistance of an LLM, for software which has been stable and used in several places for years. This person, when faced with an error on their first try, instead of pondering “what am I doing wrong” instead opened a bug report with a “fix”. Of course, they were using the software wrong. They did not follow the very short and simple instructions and essentially invented steps (probably suggested by an LLM) that caused the problem.

Waste of time for everyone involved, and one more notch on the road to causing burnout. Some of the worst kind of users are those who think “bug” means “anything which doesn’t immediately behave the way I thought it would”. LLMs empower them, to the detriment of everyone else.

Wide belief does not equal truth.

It began as an experiment in AI-assisted app design and a cross-platform “cat these files” utility.

Since then it has picked up:

- Snapshot history (and change flags) for any file selection

- A rendered folder tree that LLMs can digest, with per-prompt ignore filters

- String-based ignore rules for both tree and file output, so prompts stay surgical

My recent focus is making that generated context modular, so additional inputs (logs, design docs, architecture notes) can plug in cleanly. Apple’s new on-device foundation models could pair nicely with that.

The bigger point: most AI tooling hides the exact nature of context. FileKitty puts that step in the open and keeps the programmer in the loop.

I continue to believe LLMs can solve big problems with appropriate context and that intentionality in context prep is important step in evaluating ideas and implementation suggestions found in LLM outputs.

There's a Homebrew build available and I'd be happy to take contributions: https://github.com/banagale/FileKitty

--

When you analyze church attendance, it drops to roughly 50% instead of 85% of the population:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_attendance#Demographics

If you start to investigate many aspects of religious belief, like how many christians read the bible, the numbers drop drastically to less than 15%

https://www.statista.com/statistics/299433/bible-readership-...

This demonstrates that we cannot rely on self-reporting to understand religious belief. In practice, most people are closer to atheists than believers.

It's the same thing with AI.

Yes, and?

The goal wasn't "write me a QR library" it was "here's my pain point, solve it".

> It sounds like the author payed for `npm install`, and thinks he's on top of things and being smart.

I can put this another way if you prefer:

  Running `npm install qrious`: trivial.
  Knowing qrious exists and how to integrate it into a page: expensive.

> > Built with Aider and either Sonnet 3.5 or Gemini 2.5 Pro

> Paid tools.

I get Sonnet 4 for free at https://claude.ai — I know version numbers are weird in this domain, but I kinda expect that means Sonnet 3.5 was free at some point? Was it not? I mean, 3.7 is also a smaller version number but listed as "pro", so IDK…

Also I get Gemini 2.5 Pro for free at https://aistudio.google.com

Just out of curiosity, I've just tried using Gemini 2.5 Pro (for free) myself to try this. The result points to a CDN of qrcodejs, which I assume is this, but don't know my JS libraries so can't confirm this isn't just two different ones with the same name: https://github.com/davidshimjs/qrcodejs

My biggest issue with this kind of thing in coding is the same as my problem with libraries in general: you're responsible for the result even if you don't read what the library (/AI) is doing. So, I expect some future equivalent of the npm left-pad incident — memetic monoculture, lots of things fail at the same time.

qrious literally has it integrated already:

https://github.com/davidshimjs/qrcodejs/blob/master/index.ht...

I see many issues. The main one is that none of this is relevant to the qemu discussion. It's on another whole level of project.

I kind of regret asking the poor guy to show his stuff. None of these tutorial projects come even close to what an AI contribution to qemu would look like. It's pointless.

So the fact they've already got the example is great if you do in fact already have that knowledge, and *completely useless* if you don't.