> Throw out the garbage, keep the good stuff, and appreciate the attention to the project

The garbage in the case of an AI generated PR, is all of it. I will happily reject all of your slop and every future contribution from you if you can't follow the project's contribution guidelines.

If you don't like that, that's what forking is for.

> Just say that you don't want my code, better yet just silently reject it.

Not only I don't want it but I have some ideas what you can do with it and wher this code can go. Also, the code is not yours. I can generate the same amount of garbage as you myself using the same tools, and it will also not be mine, yet I stop myself from doing it, because more garbage is the last thing this world needs.

> Be happy that someone wants to help

How full you must be of yourself to consider pointing an LLM towards a repo as helping.

Must have been very difficult to point Claude towards a repo and trash code goes brrr, something that every person with a pulse can do.

And I shudder at the the entitlement to think that OSS maintainers have to thank you for your godly prompt and 0 amount of effort.

▲

Cheer2171 2 days ago | parent [-]

> The garbage in the case of an AI generated PR, is all of it.

I promise you that you have merged PRs with AI generated code and/or comments. You just couldn't tell because the contributor wasn't a lazy idiot and actually thought about how to use the tools at their disposal to do good work like a professional.

I swear if we left things to you people, we'd all still be programming in assembler. Copilot generates most of my commit message drafts now. I end up accepting about half of them without needing any modifications. Sometimes they're shit. That's why I'm the developer and author. I always make sure whatever PR I submit in my name is something I'm proud to stand behind. But sorry that you don't want me on your project for that sin of the tools I chose to use for my work.

▲

ath3nd 2 days ago | parent [-]

> That's why I'm the developer and author.

It's bold to call yourself an author when you merely edited something that somebody else wrote for you. It's like me going to work and all my PRs being done by 3 North Koreans in a trench coat. I am not the author then, and neither are you when using an LLM.

> sin of the tools I chose to use for my work.

Your editor is a tool, your terminal is a tool, agentic LLMs are somebody else doing your work instead of you (badly, very very badly).

▲

Cheer2171 2 days ago | parent [-]

Sure, buddy. You didn't actually respond to my point. You're so clearly irrationally triggered by AI you can't even have a rational conversation.

▲

ath3nd 2 days ago | parent [-]

I got 10 upvotes on my first answer, and 4 on the next one, how many did you have?

Maybe not everyone is so enthusiastic to reduce their skill level while simultaneously lining the pockets of our corporate overlords? Have you considered that you are in the wrong, and that's why you are irrationally triggered by people questioning your stance?

The science is clear: you start cognitively declining the more you use LLMs:

https://publichealthpolicyjournal.com/mit-study-finds-artifi...

The current research on experienced developers (be mindful this study is on experienced developers so if your mileage varies, take a second look at the word experienced) shows that their performance also declines by roughly 19% while using LLMs.

https://metr.org/blog/2025-07-10-early-2025-ai-experienced-o...

So, you are deskilling yourself while at the same time producing less than before and wasting money and burning resources, for what?

I already can see the opportunity for a business for those of us who didn't get our brains rotted by the overuse of LLMs, to fix the messes created by "engineers" using LLMs.

▲

Cheer2171 2 days ago | parent [-]

You keep not responding to the actual point I am making. I made a specific point with an example about LLM generated commit messages. You keep tilling at imaginary windmills. I'm done. You clearly need therapy.

And citing up votes? Without controlling for how votes are also a function of time since posting and depth of reply thread?

	▲	ath3nd 20 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Your point is that you didn't address any of the studies I shared, nor did you provide any counter studies, nor did you reveal your upvotes/down votes on your comments. Basically your argument is non existent, it's a type of 'trust me bro'. And LLM boosters, holding literally the most basic and mainstream position, are always the victims. The burden of proof is on you, yo. You are the one claiming something new is useful and we all should be paying attention to it and funding it. Studies say otherwise, so...now it's your turn to actually make an argument or effort, anything really. > You clearly need therapy Not from ChatGPT though! > I'm done. Can't say I am surprised! A brain conditioned to receiving sycopanthic enthusiastic agreement by an LLM even to their most unhinged takes, suddenly strugles to make a convincing argument for themselves when faced with real life pushback and immediately gives up? Delicious!