In the post, the ladybird maintainers say that they trust pull requests less than they used to, because many pull requests are authored by AI now. A big pull request no longer signals that the submitter put in a lot of work into it and it's committed to developing and maintaining quality code.
Not sure if this happened to ladybird, but the amount of junk vibecoded AI-slop pull requests has been putting an immense amount of strain on many open-source maintainers. Reviewing stuff like that is intensely energy draining an most of the time your comments will just be copy-pasted into claude code and the "contributor" will put in 0 effort themselves to try to make the code readable or maintainable.
Before AI, being open source and having to manage issues and PR's was already a huge task, burning out maintainers left and right. Now with AI, anyone with a terminal and a claude code subscription can open PR's...
So the solution is for FOSS developers to pay large sums of money to AI companies, to solve the problem that the AI companies created, for profit? ... and you typed this out as though extorting charities were a solution, instead of a grotesquely immoral and unethical systemic failure?
No, these things don’t exist in a vacuum. Most LLMs were trained on huge amounts of copyrighted works that they then regurgitate portions of without regard to license or copyright holder, and without attribution.
Why do you believe morals and ethics do not apply to software? Would you say nuclear weapons are "just physics"? What about the software involved? In that context, software is a tool that can make or break civilizations.
Honestly, this kind of disregard and reductive reasoning comes across as corrupt and sociopathic. The sentiment is a recurring theme I see on HN more than any other forum, and representative of the moral and ethical systemic failure permeating modern business and governance; how most politicians, investors, and leaders treat their users/customers/employees/constituents adversarially, as though they are marks to be fooled, manipulated, and exploited without conscience.
We should always hold each other accountable and ensure our beliefs and actions are conducive to improving everyones quality of life and standard of living. Software is no exception. These should not just be virtues to be signaled through marketing, or while standing on a pulpit, or being recorded. They are how we should strive to live our lives in private, even when nobody is watching.
So 50 years ago people who created calculators were at fault for people not calculating from memory? or 100 years ago people who created engines were at fault for people not doing manual labor anymore?
Interesting. I don't remember calculators or engines being required to solve the problems they created... nor monthly subscription fees to maintain protection from those problems... nor the companies responsible profiting off the amplification of labor, cost, time, and effort inflicted on non-profits; nothing remotely similar to the problems AI companies have forced on FOSS.
AI reviewing AI. Or in other words, having non-deterministic systems review the creation of non-deterministic systems, hoping for a deterministic result. Good luck with that.
This is direct result of AI as you can see in many other public repos.
before AI like 1 in 1000 would spend their time fixing something they had no idea about and even then considering how much time you spent and how few of those happened it made sense to review/talk about it.
now every "dev" with claude submits prs having absolutely no idea what they are even doing.
most of them would not even be able to create PR without AI in the first place.
and on top of that add slop bots that "fix" issues in the loop and create hundreds of PRs daily
This is only because of AI. In the past the barrier for contribution was high because you had to know what you are doing and put effort.
Nowadays any AI lunatic with a couple of tokens to spare can spare no effort, have no understanding and still flood you with a wall of code that on first look might even look okay (spoiler: it's actually trash). That is tiring for maintainers.
I've got a couple older cars (2010, 2003), but the only new one I'm excited about - the only actually new car I've ever considered buying - is the Slate truck:
claude package has ten new versions published per week, and one new model every few months, one should definitely not rely on some undocumented tricks around it: it'll change, it'll break deep ultra-specific configurations
This is true, but also "temporal hacks" can make or break "cutting edge" workflows. I don't re-architect my claude instructions every release. But some releases justify examining your existing instructions and making sure they still fit the current model. And it has made a noticeable difference.
I think a company has to be able to change its commitment, but should not screw users at the same time. For example, if they want to remove the free plan, why not, strategy can change with context, the world is moving around the company, so then remove it for new users not existing ones and it's all good.
AWDL is such an amazing technology, it's understandable that Apple wants to keep it only for their devices as it gives them a noticeable advantage for quick stuff sharing.
Google's QuickShare contains a reverse-engineered AWDL implementation that works on Pixel and a few other phones.
As for WiFi NAN: support for it seems rather limited outside of iOS and Android. From what I can tell the feature is barely tested on Linux and I can't find any generic Windows APIs for it either.
I've definitely used STA and AP modes concurrently on my Windows laptop with the operating system's built-in internet connection sharing function to help troubleshoot a problem in the field.
That was around a decade ago. It didn't take any extra effort on my part; I just told it to do the thing, and then it did that thing.
Researched this for a bit: there is some hardware for PCI supporting it, but Windows 10/11 not, and Linux is still work in progress, so no real support on OS level, only for some iOS/Android devices.
it might be interesting to use unused or extra wifi cards to support this. My pc motherboard has both wifi and ethernet and I only use the ethernet. That card does absolutely nothing at all.
We have been using AWDL intensely (not via AirDrop but Network.framework) for 6+ years and it fails less than 5% of the time. It's pretty impressive for a non-connected link between devices. The most common problems we face are very high device density places (100+ device in 30sqm space) and device wandering out of reach quickly (sometime as low as 5m).
The law is not about you, but about everyone:
1) Apple doesn't have service centers everywhere: some countries/cities/small towns don't have them
2) Apple doesn't provide service for older devices
3) making it easier doesn't mean you'll be able to swap them live as we did in the 90s, but it means you could do it at home with a reasonable set of tools instead of sending the device to some shop that would need to unglue, unsolder, ...
I'm assuming there were transaction IDs provided that can be given to the processor. If they can't do anything with the IDs, then that's a pretty broken system.
reply