> I don’t think any human should sacrifice their sanity untangling this mess of 600K lines of slop code. For that reason, I will not be accepting any human-coded contributions until I deem the project to be in a sane enough shape.

Very funny to see a "no humans allowed" contribution policy, and the absurd part is that the rationale actually makes sense.

I'm interested to see where this goes. Is it possible to "deslop" something of this magnitude?

▲

childintime 5 hours ago | parent [-]

As AI will only get better, accepting contributions can also be automated.

The tendency is that open source will die as a collective effort, except for some hardcore stakeouts. AI will become the repository owner. The rest of us just doesn't care enough.

This puts users in control.. just pay and you get your feature in a version generated just for you.

▲

hombre_fatal an hour ago | parent | next [-]

You're way ahead of the folks here and they've made you pay for it.

Yeah, with AI you can just fork code, get a fix/feature added, and then have AI fold back in changes if you even care about them.

Maybe people didn't realize you meant that the collective effort of human maintainers is what's dying? As AI gets better it becomes even more trivial to drive a project. The idea of bike-shedding with other people or campaigning to get in some feature that's critical to you becomes pointless.

Just last month I forked libghostty to have AI implement some features I wanted for my personal terminal project, then last week I started getting AI to build me my own terminal engine in Swift.

It came up with its own smart architecture like splitting the execution plan vs render as pty feeds come in, and many other nice things I wouldn't have had the foresight to consider on day 1 had I started the project myself. Not to mention it would have taken me many months of time I don't have.

Granted, it's a week of daily work to get it to a point where I'd use it, and probably another week of polish to where I'd swap libghostty for it. Especially with my slower AI workflow that guarantees robust, well-designed code. But I've written no code, the writing is on the wall, and this is the worst AI will ever be.

▲

titularcomment 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This does anything but put the user in control. I also think that arbitrary new features on established platforms are not in any close future as it already burns many tokens for you to instruct your agent to fork something and add x, y, z.

	▲	childintime 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		AI will improve more rapidly than you imagine it will. Open source has been built around rituals that will go the way of the LP: for the nostalgic enthusiast only. This project already shows nobody cares enough now, let alone a year from now. AI is already better than 90% of my colleagues, and none of them can write an exploit, or instantly draw on the breadth of information it can. So all they do is chaperone. Well, that will be gone too in a few years. What will remain are example repositories that serve as the starting point to add your own special feature. The curated set may well become private again, as a competitive advantage.

▲

hiccuphippo 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

>AI will become the repository owner

So Open Source transitions to Public Domain.