They do, but I still use the correct dash in code comments. It’s easy to type with a compose key. I don’t know; I’ve just always done it. I think maybe because English is not my first language so I spent a while learning all the grammatical rules; it feels wrong to deliberately break them to indicate an informal tone, the way a lot of people do online.
If the graph is not just using made up data, then it also measures absolute em-dashes, not em-dash density, so possibly could be an increase in interest in contributing to the kernel?
Escalator breaking in such a way that it goes way too quickly could make it unusable.
They, notably, did not say that PHP was good.
It’s a shorthand. It doesn’t mean that AI is categorically incapable of producing code that is acceptable. If you ask an LLM to write a hello world program I’m sure everyone here can agree it would most likely produce a correct program.
They aren’t specific about how the question was posed, no, but page 9’s wording does state that it is maintainer-estimated, and specifies the terms “low-quality” and “slop” as the qualifier for the 25% figure, so unless they’ve made a huge logical leap, I think it is reasonable to conclude that maintainers were specifically asked about low-quality AI-generated PRs (or “AI slop”). I think people are sensible enough these days to not deny that AIs sometimes produce acceptable code.
Literally just having ollama installed and some models that work well with the amount of VRAM I have. I don’t auto-start the daemon because I rarely use it. Occasionally I use it for proof-reading/feedback on things like cover letters, or debugging. I don’t let it write anything. If it has something useful to say it can tell me in the chat and I can implement it if it’s good. Usually I don’t need it though so it just sits on my disk for the most part.
If you actually read the article, you’ll see that “slop” in the survey does not refer to AI-driven PRs in general, but to specifically low-quality AI-generated PRs. The % of PRs with AI-generated code would be higher. 25% of all PRs being low-quality AI-generated code is a lot.
They are slop according to the maintainers, which I would say should be the arbiter of that.
Wow, this article really reads as LLM-generated to me. The quoted section with the “We won’t pretend otherwise:”, the second paragraph in:
This post isn’t about how to update. It’s about how these vulnerabilities were found and fixed, what has changed in how PHP security is handled over the past two years, and what we need from the organizations that depend on PHP to keep PHP’s security work going.
Could they not be bothered to write a write-up about such a critical severity?
I would say to just require them to be tagged, but the volume of them seems quite high. Might be better to just ban them and they can create a separate community.
A lot of FOSS solutions have funny names, mascots, etc. I’m surprised if IT/tech workers aren’t used to it. Just politely tell them, yes, it has slightly silly branding, but look past it and it’s software that does what you want.
Exactly. What happened to “restriction of what a user can do with software or its source code is an infringement upon the users’ rights”? I’m not saying that AI companies are acting in the spirit of FOSS, they’re not, their models aren’t even open-weight (for the most part), but the issue is not the training on materials that ought to be public domain anyway. There’s plenty of ethical issues with modern technology. It’s not sustainable at all, the supply chain is full of slavery, it generates huge amounts of emissions, etc. People’s primary concern being pearl clutching about “plagiarism” shows where their priorities lie. If AI companies have plagiarised then I couldn’t care less. It’s everything else they’re doing that’s the problem.
For things that are on Twitter but not on other websites. Of which there is still a lot. People who rely on Nitter for updates from organisations or people who only have a Twitter presence, will not stop checking those accounts just because Nitter is down. They’d just go on actual Twitter instead. Nitter at least gives them options.
Yes, it can be a bit involved. I’d say I can spin up a mail server in 1–2 days though provided the OS is already installed and I have a domain name and port 25 isn’t blocked (that’s the main one that tends to be blocked). It may take longer for people who aren’t familiar with mail servers but it’s not some huge operation.
You can just try spinning up a mail server for fun. If it goes badly then just don’t move over your dentist appointments to it. It’s only critical infra if you use it for critical things, which you probably shouldn’t till it’s stable.
I self-host my own email, have done so for years. I’ve not gotten pwned. Use an SSH key and a firewall, only expose the ports that should be public, have reasonable access controls, etc, just practise general cybersecurity—it applies to servers too.
I know everyone complains about hosting email. But I’ve not run into major problems. My emails get through spam filters and I have good uptime. It’s also a fun learning experience.
If the authors used the same method to improve GIMP, they’d be introducing a bunch of slop code to GIMP. This code is not going to be of GIMP quality.
I also doubt this will hold a candle to GIMP for the aforementioned reasons. It might appeal to a small audience, but I do not expect it to dethrone GIMP any time soon.
With syntax highlighting and everything. I suppose that’s an OF niche you could sell. Subscriptions come with programming support alongside feet pics.
Sure, a lot of school devices don’t have great controls though. I played Minecraft on the school computers. A good chunk of the devices that kids are using to comment on podcasts or whatever, a user will be able to run their own executables on. Some school computers explicitly allow this so they can teach kids to code.
No, the comment I responded to was about the ~2014 uptick, not the recent one.
The recent one is obviously AI one way or another. Absolute contribution rate is higher due to AI as well.