5 ms·

It’s starting to feel like we may need to go back to the model where you need to be invited to be able to submit code or PRs. The barrier is just too low now fo

by MBCook 5mo ago

It’s starting to feel like we may need to go back to the model where you need to be invited to be able to submit code or PRs. The barrier is just too low now for popular projects.

hsbauauvhabzb 5mo ago
I think some sort of reputation score would make more sense, assuming it’s possible to design one that can’t be easily faked
- Groxx 5mo ago
  Perhaps something where you can build a graph of who invited whom so you could prune entire sections that act maliciously. One might even consider it a to be a web of connections which are built on (or torn down by the loss of) trust. Sounds futuristic. Maybe it's an NFT on an agentic blockchain for deep-sea solar farm mining?
  - lobf 5mo ago
    Private torrent trackers apparently do this, and have done so for years.
    - perching_aix 5mo ago
      They're sarcastically describing web-of-trust: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_of_trust https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_of_trust Why are they doing that (i.e. being sarcastic)? Who knows.
      - Groxx 5mo ago
        Because it's by far the dominant strategy for distributed trust-ranking systems out there, with decades of research around it. Might as well look at the forest when realizing that it'd be nice if trees existed. And I don't think anyone actually trusts any major actor to verify anything, so a fully centralized system is likely out. Otherwise people would be hype about WorldCoin, instead of recognizing it for the stupendously malicious grift that it is.
        perching_aix 5mo ago
        > Might as well look at the forest when realizing that it'd be nice if trees existed. Curse of knowledge much? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_knowledge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_knowledge
        Groxx 5mo ago
        Only if you're one of today's 10,000: https://xkcd.com/1053/ https://xkcd.com/1053/
        perching_aix 5mo ago
        Yeah, and what I'm saying is that I think they pretty blatantly were.
  - hsbauauvhabzb 5mo ago
    You sound like a terrible person to be around.
    - AlexeyBelov 5mo ago
      How would you even know that?
      - hsbauauvhabzb 5mo ago
        Your condescending replies make you unlikable. I wouldn’t want to be around you and doubt others would either.
        AlexeyBelov 5mo ago
        I'm not the original user you were talking with. I just think you're just saying things to be upsetting to that user, with no basis in reality.
        hsbauauvhabzb 5mo ago
        I didn’t realize, but I’m fairly certain my position has a fairly factual basis. And shitty comments get even shittier replies.
jonhohle 5mo ago
It’s not just popular projects. On a small utility I have I received a PR that was more lines than the project had. I’m happy to be a good maintainer, but reviewing something that’s effectively an AI rewrite isn’t something I care to review and since I can’t vet it, can’t blindly accept it.
- MBCook 5mo ago
  I’m sure it’s all over, I was assuming the smaller projects could deal with the handful of contributions. Something like a big emulator is very complex and has a LOT of motivated users who aren’t going to be able to make quality submissions. So they get it in volume where it may be nearly impossible to deal with.
x-complexity 5mo ago
Forks need to be normalized again. Logistically & brand-wise, they're messy to deal with, but they result in a "filter" of sorts that the original project can pick & choose to upstream back into their code.
- overfeed 5mo ago
  > Forks need to be normalized again No one's going to be trusting forks or new projects for a while. The bar for merely generating new code is now too low to give a meaningful signal. Reputation and longevity will likely be useful metrics, hence the AI pull-requests will continue to be opened against high-reputation projects that have strong brands. Not unlike Ethereums the switch from proof of work to proof if stake

by MBCook 5mo ago

It’s starting to feel like we may need to go back to the model where you need to be invited to be able to submit code or PRs. The barrier is just too low now for popular projects.

hsbauauvhabzb 5mo ago

I think some sort of reputation score would make more sense, assuming it’s possible to design one that can’t be easily faked

Groxx 5mo ago
Perhaps something where you can build a graph of who invited whom so you could prune entire sections that act maliciously. One might even consider it a to be a web of connections which are built on (or torn down by the loss of) trust. Sounds futuristic. Maybe it's an NFT on an agentic blockchain for deep-sea solar farm mining?
- lobf 5mo ago
  Private torrent trackers apparently do this, and have done so for years.
  - perching_aix 5mo ago
    They're sarcastically describing web-of-trust: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_of_trust https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_of_trust Why are they doing that (i.e. being sarcastic)? Who knows.
    - Groxx 5mo ago
      Because it's by far the dominant strategy for distributed trust-ranking systems out there, with decades of research around it. Might as well look at the forest when realizing that it'd be nice if trees existed. And I don't think anyone actually trusts any major actor to verify anything, so a fully centralized system is likely out. Otherwise people would be hype about WorldCoin, instead of recognizing it for the stupendously malicious grift that it is.
      - perching_aix 5mo ago
        > Might as well look at the forest when realizing that it'd be nice if trees existed. Curse of knowledge much? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_knowledge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_knowledge
        Groxx 5mo ago
        Only if you're one of today's 10,000: https://xkcd.com/1053/ https://xkcd.com/1053/
        perching_aix 5mo ago
        Yeah, and what I'm saying is that I think they pretty blatantly were.
- hsbauauvhabzb 5mo ago
  You sound like a terrible person to be around.
  - AlexeyBelov 5mo ago
    How would you even know that?
    - hsbauauvhabzb 5mo ago
      Your condescending replies make you unlikable. I wouldn’t want to be around you and doubt others would either.
      - AlexeyBelov 5mo ago
        I'm not the original user you were talking with. I just think you're just saying things to be upsetting to that user, with no basis in reality.
        hsbauauvhabzb 5mo ago
        I didn’t realize, but I’m fairly certain my position has a fairly factual basis. And shitty comments get even shittier replies.

jonhohle 5mo ago

It’s not just popular projects. On a small utility I have I received a PR that was more lines than the project had. I’m happy to be a good maintainer, but reviewing something that’s effectively an AI rewrite isn’t something I care to review and since I can’t vet it, can’t blindly accept it.

MBCook 5mo ago
I’m sure it’s all over, I was assuming the smaller projects could deal with the handful of contributions. Something like a big emulator is very complex and has a LOT of motivated users who aren’t going to be able to make quality submissions. So they get it in volume where it may be nearly impossible to deal with.

x-complexity 5mo ago

Forks need to be normalized again. Logistically & brand-wise, they're messy to deal with, but they result in a "filter" of sorts that the original project can pick & choose to upstream back into their code.

overfeed 5mo ago
> Forks need to be normalized again No one's going to be trusting forks or new projects for a while. The bar for merely generating new code is now too low to give a meaningful signal. Reputation and longevity will likely be useful metrics, hence the AI pull-requests will continue to be opened against high-reputation projects that have strong brands. Not unlike Ethereums the switch from proof of work to proof if stake