2 ms·
If you don't disclose the use of - books - search engines - stack overflow - talking to a coworker then it's not clear why you would have to disclose talki
by ants_everywhere 1y ago
If you don't disclose the use of
- books
- search engines
- stack overflow
- talking to a coworker
then it's not clear why you would have to disclose talking to an AI.
Generally speaking, when someone uses the word "slop" when talking about AI it's a signal to me that they've been sucked into a culture war and to discount what they say about AI.
It's of course the maintainer's right to take part in a culture war, but it's a useful way to filter out who's paying attention vs who's playing for a team. Like when you meet someone at a party and they bring up some politician you've barely heard of but who their team has vilified.
- latexr 1y ago> then it's not clear why you would have to disclose talking to an AI. It’s explained right there in the PR: > The disclosure is to help maintainers assess how much attention to give a PR. While we aren't obligated to in any way, I try to assist inexperienced contributors and coach them to the finish line, because getting a PR accepted is an achievement to be proud of. But if it's just an AI on the other side, I don't need to put in this effort, and it's rude to trick me into doing so. That is not true of books, search engines, stack overflow, or talking to a worker, because in all those cases you still had to do the work yourself of comprehending, preparing, and submitting the patch. This is also why they ask for a disclosure of “the extent to which AI assistance was used”. What about that isn’t clear to you?
- ants_everywhere 1y ago[flagged]
- computerfriend 1y agoYou should add citations to books, stack overflow posts and colleagues you consult with, yes.