←back to thread

Define policy forbidding use of AI code generators

(github.com)
493 points todsacerdoti | 1 comments | 25 Jun 25 23:26 UTC | HN request time: 0.209s | source
Show context
JonChesterfield ◴[26 Jun 25 00:02 UTC] No.44382974[source]▶
Interesting. Harder line than the LLVM one found at https://llvm.org/docs/DeveloperPolicy.html#ai-generated-cont...

I'm very old man shouting at clouds about this stuff. I don't want to review code the author doesn't understand and I don't want to merge code neither of us understand.

replies(8): >>44383040 #>>44383128 #>>44383155 #>>44383230 #>>44383315 #>>44383409 #>>44383434 #>>44384226 #
compton93 ◴[26 Jun 25 00:15 UTC] No.44383040[source]▶
I don't want to review code the author doesn't understand

This really bothers me. I've had people ask me to do some task except they get AI to provide instructions on how to do the task and send me the instructions, rather than saying "Hey can you please do X". It's insulting.

replies(4): >>44383112 #>>44383861 #>>44386706 #>>44387097 #
andy99 ◴[26 Jun 25 00:29 UTC] No.44383112[source]▶
Had someone higher up ask about something in my area of expertise. I said I didn't think is was possible, he followed up with a chatGPT conversation he had where it "gave him some ideas that we could use as an approach", as if that was some useful insight.

This is the same people that think that "learning to code" is a translation issue they don't have time for as opposed to experience they don't have.

replies(11): >>44383199 #>>44383252 #>>44383294 #>>44383446 #>>44383599 #>>44383887 #>>44383941 #>>44383965 #>>44386199 #>>44388138 #>>44390838 #
alluro2 ◴[26 Jun 25 01:04 UTC] No.44383294[source]▶
A friend experienced a similar thing at work - he gave a well-informed assessment of why something is difficult to implement and it would take a couple of weeks, based on the knowledge of the system and experience with it - only for the manager to reply within 5 min with a screenshot of an (even surprisingly) idiotic ChatGPT reply, and a message along the lines of "here's how you can do it, I guess by the end of the day".

I know several people like this, and it seems they feel like they have god powers now - and that they alone can communicate with "the AI" in this way that is simply unreachable by the rest of the peasants.

replies(4): >>44383594 #>>44383716 #>>44385869 #>>44387589 #
OptionOfT ◴[26 Jun 25 02:03 UTC] No.44383594[source]▶
Same here. You throw a question in a channel. Someone responds in 1 minute with a code example that either you had laying around, or would take > 5 minutes to write.

The code example was AI generated. I couldn't find a single line of code anywhere in any codebase. 0 examples on GitHub.

And of course it didn't work.

But, it sent me on a wild goose because I trusted this person to give me a valuable insight. It pisses me off so much.

replies(1): >>44386873 #
1. mailund ◴[26 Jun 25 12:43 UTC] No.44386873[source]▶
I experienced mentioning an issue I was stuck on during standup one day, then some guy on my team DMs me a screenshot of chatGPT with text about how to solve the issue. When I explained to him why the solution he had sent me didn't make sense and wouldn't solve the issue, he sent me back the reply the LLM would give by pasting in my reply, at which point I stopped responding.

I'm just really confused what people who send LLM content to other people think they are achieving? Like if I wanted an LLM response, I would just prompt the LLM myself, instead of doing it indirectly though another person who copy/pastes back and forth.