Relevant since we started outright rejecting agent-made PRs in awesome-selfhosted [1] and issuing bans for it. Some PRs made in good faith could probably get caught in the net, but it’s currently the only decent tradeoff we could make to absorb the massive influx of (bad) contributions. >99.9% of them are invalid for other reasons anyway. Maybe a good solution will emerge over time.

  • TheHolm@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    28
    ·
    10 hours ago

    This is one good article. I guess humans are now mostly redundant in open source. Bots can do everything themself, write code, submit PR, merge them and even blog about it. Time to book a place for myself in a graveyard.

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      … did you read the same article as everyone else? I can’t tell if you’re joking or not.

    • porcoesphino@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Instead of a handful of quality PRs per day, the volume jumped to 20, 50, or more. At first I was happy. Then I started noticing patterns. The quality wasn’t there.

      Blindly promoting the LLMs without checking the source? Bot or human it makes you wonder if your contributions are worth keeping around