4 ms·

I did not much more than a cursory glance too, but found "./sandbox/create.go", a ~1300 lines long file with so much duplication even within just itself that I

I did not much more than a cursory glance too, but found "./sandbox/create.go", a ~1300 lines long file with so much duplication even within just itself that I stopped counting. Now it was a long time ago I did Go professionally, but I'm also in the camp of "That doesn't really count as high-quality", although I know for a fact you can get quality code out of LLMs, but I don't think that's a good showcase of that.

kstenerud 5mo ago
> I did not much more than a cursory glance too, but found "./sandbox/create.go", a ~1300 lines long file with so much duplication even within just itself that I stopped counting. Really? What duplication did you actually find? I count a few small ones in buildMounts and ReadPrompt, maybe 20 lines or so, but hardly anything worthy of such an epithet. Admittedly, the parsing & escaping code and some utility functions could be moved outside to shrink the file, but otherwise I'm having trouble finding issues with the code.
- embedding-shape 5mo ago
  The duplication I'm seeing isn't just "same text repeated" but structural duplication. Doing a quick 5 minute look again just to give you some pointers; runtime.MountSpec construction in buildMounts, Workdir vs aux-dir mount-mode handling, repeated one-off mount append blocks, overlay detection and so on, the list goes on. Just those should account for 200+ lines. Look for slight variations of the same thing but with different paths, variables, or modes and I think you'd be able to spot the rest as well.
  - kstenerud 5mo ago
    You consider adding in-place constructed items to an array to be code duplication?
    - freedomben 5mo ago
      I've noticed that the bar for "quality" when people judge AI is often significantly higher than what they'd hold a human to. I'm not saying GP et al are doing this (I haven't looked myself), but it is a widespread pattern I've noticed both professionally and personally. I don't know why it is.
      - kenjackson 5mo ago
        I have seen it too. The answer is easy - they don’t like AI. I've seen similar things with some people that don’t like women in tech or certain minorities - they suddenly critique at an extremely high level. I also haven’t looked at this particular case, but it wouldn’t surprise me to be the same thing here.
        TurkTurkleton 5mo ago
        Dude, are you for real? We've had the supposed inevitability of AI rammed down our throats since the minute LaMDA convinced Blake Lemoine it was sentient, we've watched CEOs hype up AI as if it were production-ready while it was still barely beta quality, LLM-driven chatbots have been stapled to the side of every product no matter how little sense it makes since OpenAI published an API, and we've been told to prepare for the inevitable "agentic future" even as Claude 3.5 had to have its hand held more than a wet-behind-the-ears freshman summer intern. We're told that this technology is going to eat the entire world economy and render human labor obsolete, starting with our jobs, but if it's genuinely supposed to do that, I think it's more than reasonable to expect it to write superhumanly perfect code, not just code that's incrementally better than the last model release but still bad; extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, after all. To liken AI skepticism to the obstacles faced by women and minorities in tech is a category error that trivializes actual human struggles against human prejudices.
        embedding-shape 5mo ago
        > I also haven’t looked at this particular case, but it wouldn’t surprise me to be the same thing here. Be surprised then, because me, who left the critique, probably exclusively programmed with agents for the last year or so, so unlikely I think the code is bad because I "don't like AI". I don't love it either, but wouldn't call myself a AI-hater by any measurements, would be weird to write articles like this if so: https://emsh.cat/en/one-human-one-agent-one-browser/ https://emsh.cat/en/one-human-one-agent-one-browser/

kstenerud 5mo ago

> I did not much more than a cursory glance too, but found "./sandbox/create.go", a ~1300 lines long file with so much duplication even within just itself that I stopped counting. Really? What duplication did you actually find? I count a few small ones in buildMounts and ReadPrompt, maybe 20 lines or so, but hardly anything worthy of such an epithet. Admittedly, the parsing & escaping code and some utility functions could be moved outside to shrink the file, but otherwise I'm having trouble finding issues with the code.

embedding-shape 5mo ago
The duplication I'm seeing isn't just "same text repeated" but structural duplication. Doing a quick 5 minute look again just to give you some pointers; runtime.MountSpec construction in buildMounts, Workdir vs aux-dir mount-mode handling, repeated one-off mount append blocks, overlay detection and so on, the list goes on. Just those should account for 200+ lines. Look for slight variations of the same thing but with different paths, variables, or modes and I think you'd be able to spot the rest as well.
- kstenerud 5mo ago
  You consider adding in-place constructed items to an array to be code duplication?
  - freedomben 5mo ago
    I've noticed that the bar for "quality" when people judge AI is often significantly higher than what they'd hold a human to. I'm not saying GP et al are doing this (I haven't looked myself), but it is a widespread pattern I've noticed both professionally and personally. I don't know why it is.
    - kenjackson 5mo ago
      I have seen it too. The answer is easy - they don’t like AI. I've seen similar things with some people that don’t like women in tech or certain minorities - they suddenly critique at an extremely high level. I also haven’t looked at this particular case, but it wouldn’t surprise me to be the same thing here.
      - TurkTurkleton 5mo ago
        Dude, are you for real? We've had the supposed inevitability of AI rammed down our throats since the minute LaMDA convinced Blake Lemoine it was sentient, we've watched CEOs hype up AI as if it were production-ready while it was still barely beta quality, LLM-driven chatbots have been stapled to the side of every product no matter how little sense it makes since OpenAI published an API, and we've been told to prepare for the inevitable "agentic future" even as Claude 3.5 had to have its hand held more than a wet-behind-the-ears freshman summer intern. We're told that this technology is going to eat the entire world economy and render human labor obsolete, starting with our jobs, but if it's genuinely supposed to do that, I think it's more than reasonable to expect it to write superhumanly perfect code, not just code that's incrementally better than the last model release but still bad; extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, after all. To liken AI skepticism to the obstacles faced by women and minorities in tech is a category error that trivializes actual human struggles against human prejudices.
      - embedding-shape 5mo ago
        > I also haven’t looked at this particular case, but it wouldn’t surprise me to be the same thing here. Be surprised then, because me, who left the critique, probably exclusively programmed with agents for the last year or so, so unlikely I think the code is bad because I "don't like AI". I don't love it either, but wouldn't call myself a AI-hater by any measurements, would be weird to write articles like this if so: https://emsh.cat/en/one-human-one-agent-one-browser/ https://emsh.cat/en/one-human-one-agent-one-browser/