• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    23•6 hours ago

    On the contrary, a small piece of text that says “this code deserves more review because humans may not have seen it” is absolutely necessary.

    All this is doing is making it so I can hide that I didn’t touch the code.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      7•4 hours ago

      On the contrary, a small piece of text that says “this code deserves more review because humans may not have seen it” is absolutely necessary.

      All this is doing is making it so I can hide that I didn’t touch the code.

      Why are you assuming that everyone would honestly disclose AI use if it was a rule?

      The honest ones that would disclose it to say “this needs more eyes, guys” can still do just that. The dishonest ones that would hide AI use will do exactly that whether it’s a rule or not.

      The only difference here is there’s no punitive action to follow for non-disclosure because that would be a gigantic waste of time when, AI or not, all code needs to be reviewed anyway.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        9•4 hours ago

        I have to say the same thing I said to the other commenter; I’m really not sure that “some people lie so nobody should care about the truth” is the argument you think it is.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          6•3 hours ago

          I have to say the same thing I said to the other commenter; I’m really not sure that “some people lie so nobody should care about the truth” is the argument you think it is.

          Nice attempt at spin but relies too much on readers having room temperature IQ to believe that’s what my argument is. And just to be clear, by ‘Nice attempt’ I’m being sarcastic.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            4•30 minutes ago

            What kind of psycopath quotes the entire comment they’re replying to? As if your opinions weren’t enough of a red flag.

    • ghost_laptop
      link
      fedilink
      2•
      edit-2
      5 hours ago

      because there is no guarantee the code will be wrong per se. should junior developers need to disclose this fact, then? because according to your logic their code could be wrong! furthermore, there’s the fact people will do whatever the fuck they want, regardless of you raging on an internet forum about disclosure. people might not even read that shit because they don’t give a fuck. so you end up with half assed policy which you cannot enforce. job well done, let’s go home boys.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        6•5 hours ago

        Junior developers’ code always goes through more review, yes. Also, I’m not sure “some people lie so nobody should care about the truth” is the argument you think it is.

        • ghost_laptop
          link
          fedilink
          3•5 hours ago

          no, people who have never contributed to the linux kernel are “flagged” simply because maintainers have never seen this person, but there’s no “junior developer disclosure policy”. you could be a senior dev who simply is contributing for their first time. you could be receiving ai assisted code by very old contributors, for example, which in the eyes of the maintainers is a certain feeling of trust precisely because that person has a history with the project. i think your comprehension skills are poor, since that’s not what i said. my argument is that a policy that cannot be enforced and as argumented also provide very little gain, is not doing much at all. if a policy does nothing, what is the purpose of this policy?