Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

62% Positive

Analyzed from 955 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#code#claude#open#source#prs#using#projects#need#barrier#help

Discussion (7 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

jamesuabout 1 hour ago
We've seen a few takes on this kind of issue, but the solution I liked the best was the linux "developers take full responsibility" approach. The "Assisted-by:" tag was a pretty nice touch too.

The article unfortunately feels more like a rant than a good exploration of the problem space.

ollienabout 1 hour ago
I've struggled with this "responsibility" take. What does it mean in the context of an open source project? As far as I understand it, the original contributors of bugs are often not the ones fixing them (though they can be). Is it that if you write enough buggy code you get banned as a contributor? Is it that you're not allowed to say Claude ate my homework?
bayarearefugee29 minutes ago
> the solution I liked the best was the linux "developers take full responsibility" approach.

The people who can realistically submit a Linux patch that will ever get looked at is already a super select group through who-you-know network effects.

You can't apply the same system to random open source projects, the best option for people that run random small to medium sized open source projects is just to ban all unsolicited PRs, otherwise you're going to spend way too much effort sorting through the slop.

MBCookabout 1 hour ago
It’s starting to feel like we may need to go back to the model where you need to be invited to be able to submit code or PRs. The barrier is just too low now for popular projects.
hsbauauvhabzb30 minutes ago
I think some sort of reputation score would make more sense, assuming it’s possible to design one that can’t be easily faked
Groxx26 minutes ago
Perhaps something where you can build a graph of who invited whom so you could prune entire sections that act maliciously. One might even consider it a to be a web of connections which are built on (or torn down by the loss of) trust.

Sounds futuristic. Maybe it's an NFT on an agentic blockchain for deep-sea solar farm mining?

_JoRoabout 1 hour ago
I'm curious what percentage of PRs are just the AI blindly writing code and submitting a PR without testing, and which have at least been locally tested to some degree. Any OS maintainers have any insights on this?
koolba30 minutes ago
> … and submitting a PR without testing, and which have at least been locally tested to some degree.

There’s no need to test the PR when you already asked the AI to not make any mistakes.

greenknight30 minutes ago
Thats the thing, what if the codebases had CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md files, which clearly dictated that

A) tests need to pass

B) anything you write needs tests

C) the code quality must adhere to these standards

etc.etc.... Helping the LLMs that people Vibe code with, produce better quality results.

By not having these in place, it means people who want to help out, cant. because htey dont understand whats going on.

adding stuff to these files, woudl allow developers to give guidelines / guardrails for developement using these agents.

Should the barrier of entry be someone who knows how to code? or should the barrier of entry be someone who is motivated to help with open-source software.

int0x2924 minutes ago
It really shouldn't be the RPCS3 devs' problem to fix other people's broken AI pipelines.
GCUMstlyHarmls24 minutes ago
> Should the barrier of entry be someone who knows how to code? or should the barrier of entry be someone who is motivated to help with open-source software.

Probably yes? QED submitting slop PRs is not helping. If "helping" is sticking it through an LLM, the developers can do that themselves with better insight and guidance? If you must help via an LLM, donate cash for tokens.

If you can't code, and cant donate cash/machine time, help by confirming issue reproductions, design, wikis, documentation, whatever.

gerdesjabout 1 hour ago
Ask ChatGPT: You'll get an authoritative answer!
HDBaseTabout 1 hour ago
I recently just started using Claude/ChatGPT/China models for some PS3 homebrew work.

Every model seemingly falls flat in this scope of programming. The PS3 is very complex and the tooling is fairly undocumented in a lot of instances. It doesn't surprise me most of these AI PR's are nonsense.

If anyone else has attempted writing PS3 homebrew apps using AI and has refined their tooling/systems/automation please let me know how you got the agents to work for you (:

Aurornis13 minutes ago
I like to send Claude Code or Codex on max settings off to try a problem in parallel while I work on it.

In a complex codebase it’s funny how often they’ll come back with gigantic commits that just make everything worse or accomplish the goal but have 1000 lines of unnecessary complexity.

Every time they present it with a confident summary. I can see how a junior or just lazy dev would think this is their ticket to becoming a contributor to a repo with some big thing to put on their resume.

_JoRoabout 1 hour ago
I've been working on a project myself over the last few weeks where the documentation is quite minimal. To no surprise the LLMs fell flat at being able to generate any sort of meaningful code. However, I realized that if I focused first on building out documentation and coding tools (linters, parsers, formatters, etc...), LLMs can do a decent job at solving fundamental problems.
saagarjhaabout 1 hour ago
The emulation space is particularly bad about this because there are a lot of semi-technical and "well meaning" users who will do anything to get their games to play better and AI gives them a way to make it seem like they are doing something useful, without being able to judge the quality of the output they are producing.

One of the projects I work on recently had a guy drop by and explain that he wanted to use Claude to clean up our backlog and he absolutely could not fathom why I kept bringing up that we would only accept PRs that reduced our work instead of increasing it. "Do you know what Opus 4.7 is?" "Why are you so close-minded?". Unfortunately it is very hard for these users to understand that the thing they are using has a bar for quality and the bugs that still slip through cannot be solved by waving a magic wand at it.

loloquwowndueoabout 1 hour ago
A good argument to use could be: I can use Claude myself, so I will if I need to, but you using Claude on my behalf doesn’t save me any work, it just introduces another layer of noise into the mix. (Yes calling the guy “noise” haha)
NoMoreNicksLeft19 minutes ago
Over the last month, I've been using Claude to assist in some things that were at the edge of my ability (or maybe just a hair's breadth beyond it). I've added features to open source projects that everyone's been waiting years for. I always fork it telling myself that I want to be able to submit PRs, but really I'm just making the changes for myself, since I don't even have the nerve to show it off.

If these people can make changes to the emulators that will actually make the games more playable for them, the changes don't have to go back into the official project. It works for them and makes things better.

Right now, I've been working on some changes to the mkv container spec to have embedded scripting cable of doing Black Mirror: Bandersnatch in interactive mode. VLC and mpv. I've already added mutable torrent support to Transmission, and it works. But yeh, if someone took a look at it who really knew the code, they'd see it was AI slop and do a hard pass.