| ▲ | nurettin 4 hours ago |
| It is amusing to see that the only concern seems to be about a confusion around licensing, not the validity or maintainability of the code itself. |
|
| ▲ | tolciho 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Eh, well, if your guns are trained on the "copyright" portion of the ship and you can sink it from there, no need to waste ammo or time trying to figure out if code bits are as explosive as the copyright bits are. Probably the code is just as sinkable, e.g. here's a recent response to some other AI slop: I didn't look closely at most of the code but one thing that caught my eye, pid is not safe for tempfile name generation, another user of the system can easily generate files that conflict with this. Functions like mktemp and mkstemp are there for a reason. Some of the other "safety" checks make no sense. If the LLM code generator is coming up with things which any competent unix sysadmin (let alone programmer) can tell are obviously wrong, it doesn't bode well for the rest.
https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-ports&m=177460682403496&w=2The next AI winter can't come soon enough… |
|
| ▲ | kvuj 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| How is that different than a human writing the code? Whether an AI or a human wrote it, I would expect the same bar of validity/maintainability. |
| |
| ▲ | nurettin 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | To me, SOTA is just bad at DRY, KISS, succint, well architected, top down, easy to test code and has to be constantly steered to come close. Even the article suggests that. YMMV. | | |
| ▲ | serf 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | TDD and strong goals help.. ..much like with human development. |
| |
| ▲ | scuff3d 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Because humans make design decisions, AI just bangs it's head against the problem until it gets something that "works". |
|
|
| ▲ | g0xA52A2A 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Is it worth the effort to review until such implications are understood? |
| |
