4 ms·
The problem is really behavioural, not the tooling. People that do not understand, test and document their decision making in their PRs should not be submitting
by sockbot 5mo ago
The problem is really behavioural, not the tooling. People that do not understand, test and document their decision making in their PRs should not be submitting them, regardless of what tooling (AI or otherwise) they used to create them.
This problem existed before AI, but it is now just worse due to the spamming nature of these "contributors". It's another form of endless September where people unfamiliar with the norms of team software development are overwhelming existing project maintainers faster than maintainers can teach them the norms of behaviour.
In the end, some sort of gatekeeping mechanism is needed to avoid overwhelming maintainers, whether it's a reputation system, membership in an in-group, or something else.
- 7e 5mo ago[flagged]
- gassi 5mo agoYou wouldn't hold that opinion it you did maintain a popular open-source repo or interact with AI "PR review" tools at a serious level. Even the most SOTA models are willing to accept/merge absolutely trash PRs so long at the summitter can convince it that is addressed it's review comments.
- heavyset_go 5mo agoNo, it is a tooling problem. The tooling is telling laymen that they built wonderful things that definitely work and perfectly fix and add features. The tooling gasses them up and is simply wrong in these cases. If your tool regularly lies, gaslights and produces wrong results, that's a tooling issue.
- fatata123 5mo ago[dead]
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- Den_VR 5mo agoDoes the hammer lie to you that everything is a nail? Can a voltmeter _lie_ to you? EE are expected to know when their measurements are wrong. And Professional Engineers are legally accountable for consequences of such mistakes.
- possibleworlds 5mo agoIf a hammer had a chat interface that said everything was a nail then the answer would be yes, the hammer lies to you about everything being a nail.
- walletdrainer 5mo agoIf someone believes a hammer when it tells them such things, they should probably have some sort of a caretaker assigned to help them through life.
- mvid 5mo agoIf hammer companies were suddenly the most valuable international companies, and spent millions on ad campaigns and lobbying about trusting the hammer interface, then you can assume a large amount of people might trust the hammer interface
- walletdrainer 5mo agoWhere are the ad campaigns telling me to trust LLMs? I don’t use an adblocker, do read traditional dead tree newspapers and do get exposed to satellite tv channels. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone anywhere telling me how reliable LLMs are. Pretty sure this tech sells itself to consumers, enterprise sales are what they’ve always been.
- card_zero 5mo agoSo now you're pivoting away from the caretaker proposal? I thought it had potential but I don't know how you'd fund it.
- onion2k 5mo agoIf your tool regularly lies, gaslights and produces wrong results, that's a tooling issue. It's a human issue if you don't recognise that the code it's generated is wrong. That will never change no matter how good the tooling gets.
- kiba 5mo agoThe tooling is the issue because humans designed the tooling wrong. It's a chatbot interface fined tuned to sycophancy. That's not a coincidence.
- Hamuko 5mo agoIsn't part of the problem that these tools are advertised as allowing non-coders to code? How are you gonna recognise that the code is wrong when you don't know how to code and the product is telling you that you don't even need to?
- drw85 5mo agoWould it be a human issue, if you type something into a calculator and the calculated result is wrong? Would anyone use a calculator confidently, if the result was randomly generated?
- allarm 5mo agoWhy do you think this analogy is even remotely correct? It’s well-known that LLMs produce non-deterministic results. It’s also well-known that they hallucinate. To make it even clearer, all the top LLM players make sure to remind everyone of that behavior. If calculators had similar effects and warnings, it would have been a valid analogy. Instead, you're comparing apples and oranges.
- drw85 5mo agoI think it's a valid analogy in some contexts. Like when talking to a person that is not aware of non-determinism and hallucinations. Which happens on this website very frequently. Many people here tell you to use AI like you use a calculator. With minimal or no oversight, with full access to production systems, etc. To let a non deterministic tool communicate on your behalf, or give it access to critical systems is evidence enough that a good number of people are not aware of these facts.
- bingo-bongo 5mo ago> ..laymen.. That’s the behavioral problem. When AI is assisting a professional, the outcome is vastly different.
- amiga386 5mo agoIf investors invest heavily in lemon juice, then go around hyping it and selling it with the promise it makes you invisible to cameras (which it doesn't), it doesn't matter how stupid and gullible the rubes who fall for that are, the investors bear the responsibility for giving them that idea, when people start attempting to rob banks with lemon juice on their faces. (cf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Greater_Pittsburgh_bank_robberies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_Greater_Pittsburgh_bank_r...) Hype is bad. Unwarranted hype is worse. Enabling people who can't do a thing to do what they think the thing is, but isn't, because they don't know any better, is inflicting a pox upon the world.
- nh23423fefe 5mo agoWhat you say makes no sense and no one will act in the ways you proscribe.
- AnthonBerg 5mo agoBy definition of responsibility it is a behavioral problem.
- teo_zero 5mo agoTechnical analysis tells you that a stock is in its upwards trend. You invest all your money on it without thinking twice. The price goes down and you lose thousands of dollars. Is it a tool problem? LLMs spit out a sequence of tokens that is the most probable continuation of the input. LLMs don't lie any more than technical analysis does when it predicts the most likely trend of stock prices. It's up to you how to use this information.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- potsandpans 5mo agoEveryone, "please please please don't personify llms it's so harmful." Also everyone, "the inanimate tool is lying and tricking people into inundating open source developers with poorly thought out slop."
- heavyset_go 5mo agoI am personally everyone
- zamadatix 5mo agoThere will usually be more than one issue, Sockbot's solution just happens to deal with more than one at a time.
- emsign 5mo agoNope. If the tooling is fooling then the tooling IS the problem.
- ASalazarMX 5mo agoThe tooling shouldn't be more clever than the user, otherwise the user is incredibly gullible. IMO the problem is that AI is filling an psychological need, not an intellectual one.