Why did a PM create the merge request? It seems like internal testing brought up issues, why was it merged regardless? Is velocity a metric you were aiming for when merging this?
There are customers who would like to see attribution on changes where AI contributed (companies, users, etc). True, that's not everyone, but you can query our repo for the issues for which this feature was implemented.
The rationale I suppose is those customers what to be more careful with code that was contributed by AI.
I don't see how this would actually help. If people don't want to disclose they used AI they will just strip the message from the commit.
Maybe those customers should just be more selective with the people they allow to contribute to their project?
Also, this kind of message doesn't even bring valuable info: it doesn't explain how the AI was used (could be 99% vibe-coding, or just a quick "Please review current changes" + minor fixes at the end?), which model was used, etc. Like other commenters here I can't see this as anything else than a marketing push for Copilot.
Don't take it personally though, you are probably not the one that should be taking the heat since the change was directly pushed by your product manager.
Please don't be personally aggressive in HN comments, regardless of how provoked you are or feel you are. We're trying for something different here, and we particularly want to avoid pile-on, shaming, and mob dynamics.
Edit: your account has unfortunately done this before (e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47548889). I don't want to ban you, so if you'd please review the site rules and not do anything like this again on HN, we'd appreciate it.
I can’t access that LinkedIn link without going through their Persona ID process, which requires all kinds of PII.
> LinkedIn users attempting identity verification may be unknowingly handing sensitive personal data to Persona Identities Inc., a company that distributes information to government agencies, credit bureaus, utilities, and mobile providers.
^ Link from a LinkedIn page I found on a Kagi search.
I can view some LinkedIn pages but not others without logging in.
Even though I’ve never posted to LinkedIn it only use it as a public résumé, my account was flagged as needing identity verification. I’m pretty sure this happened a year or two ago when I changed my email address from one domain I owned to another domain I owned.
I’ve never been able to log in since then, and there is no support path. The only available way past it is to simply submit all the info to Persona.
I'm not him, but it was pretty obvious that the comments section was going to be attracting more and more people saying the same thing that had already been said before, and that no useful discussion was going to be had. At some point the value of spamming everyone who commented on the issue with a notification (which puts an email in your inbox if you haven't changed the default setting) becomes lower and lower.
I've seen that before on other issue comment threads. The repo owner says "Hey everyone, if you want an issue fixed, please upvote the issue with a thumbs up". And many people don't read that, and instead post "Please fix this" comments without giving a thumbs-up to the issue. So, 1) the repo owner doesn't get to use the "sort issues by # of thumbs-up reactions" to see the priority of that issue, and 2) everyone who has subscribed to the issue gets spammed with a message that's useless to them.
Since nearly all the new comments had become "me too"-style comments, which should have just been a thumbs-up on a previous comment in order to reduce spam, I feel like locking the issue thread was the right move at that point, to stop people from receiving yet more unnecessary email in their already-overflowing inboxes.
Because the `microsoft` group account is the owner of the repo. With group accounts, you can designate many individuals to have admin access to the repo, but the actions taken by those admins will be attributed to the group account that owns the repo. (Because presumably the rest of the admins agree with the action taken, otherwise they would undo/revert it).
This is what happens when nontechnical people land production code in order to game their promotion metrics.
I sense the PM in question is disconnected from the sensibilities of the users she ostensibly represents. Looking at her record I see she never worked as a programmer. But with four years in her current position she ought to have figured this much out. Strong AI incentives perhaps?
Large companies have been incentivizing and correlating token spend to performance, thus creating needless spend of tokens for now. Goodharts Law and all that.
I've heard the parable, "If you didn't eat breakfast or lunch yesterday, how would you feel around 3pm?", a common response is apparently "but I did eat lunch and breakfast yesterday".
Patrick (patio11) has been actively speaking about the Delve (YCW24) fraud allegations - (https://deepdelver.substack.com/p/192144506 - Pt2) extensively on X/Twitter. Delve's response is lacking.
Delve will soon fail as a visible example of fairness. The other startups exaggerating their product and financials will continue for now.
The founders fake interviews on TikTok were amusing to say the least, dropout 20 year olds with 8 papers published, we're dealing with Von Neumanns by the dozens.
We are only slowing growth after a big jump in hiring during COVID 2020-2022... these attention grabbing slop headlines are junk news.
"We’ve lost 50k jobs last two years after decades of adding 100k+ every year including the pandemic highs of 300k+ per year. Total employment remains way above 2000s, 2008 and 2020 unlike the title suggests."
reply