Even before the ai age, people published inaccurate/misleading benchmarks all the time. Sometimes those were actual cheating, and other times an honest mistake. What matters is that the author acknowledges the issue and attempts to correct the mistake, which clearly seems to have happened here: https://github.com/ClickHouse/ClickBench/pull/2751

Most of this thread doesn't seem to acknowledge that, and feels more like anti-ai psychosis using this incident as an anecdote to justify the pre-existing hatred of ai-generated projects.

▲

the__alchemist 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I suspect the author of that PR submitted it and attempted to correct the mistake because he got caught. Forgiveness because he reneged after getting caught encourages the behavior. The project, nor author should not be trusted; otherwise is naive.

	▲	acalvino4 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		"suspect" meaning speculate, as far as I can tell. not really anything to argue with on that front. I never denied there was a mistake. Cheating implies intent, which no one here can prove, so seems useless to debate. Open source development is awesome in that it keeps people to a high bar, let's just celebrate that the process clearly worked here, and not muck about in speculation and judgement of others intentions that we have essentially no evidence for.
	▲	3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		[deleted]

▲

hmry 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> acknowledges the issue

I don't see any acknowledgement in that text.

	▲	acalvino4 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		submitting corrections is an acknowledgment in action