Yeah, either this guy's totally insane or it could even be somebody who's an AI skeptic who's just flooding projects with really dumb PRs just to show the risks and get people skeptical about the use of AI in open source (Takes on my folie hat)
that's a grifter doing grifting. there was a thread on /g/ about this guy the other day, anons digged out much of its past as a failure / grifter in many areas, running away with the money at the first problem
function estimate_method_targets(func_name::Symbol, types::Tuple)
# Conservative estimate
# In a real implementation, we'd query the method table
return 2 # Assume multiple possibilities
end
Hilarious. Was this model trained on XKCD [0] by any chance?
Among all the other problems with this... They describe [1] their contributions as "steering the AI" and "keeping it honest", which evidently they did not.
As an aside, he originally titled the thread "A complete guide to building static binaries with Julia (updated for 1.12)", with no mention of AI. That got me excited every time I opened the Discourse, until I remembered it was this slop. :/
Lot of people are criticising this guy but we all benefit from having an example to show people - this, please don’t do what this guy is doing. Please read the generated code, understand it, edit it and then submit it.
If anyone’s answer to “why does your PR do this” is “I don’t know, the AI did it and I didn’t question it” then they need a time out.
The biggest mistake, AI or not, is dropping a 10K+ PR. 300~500 LOC is how far one should be going, unless they're doing some automated refactoring. E.g. formatting the entire StaticCompiler.jl source. This should've been a distinct PR, preferably by a maintainer.
It could first judge whether the PR is frivolous, then try to review it, then flag a human if necessary.
The problem is that Github, or whatever system hosts the process, should actively prevent projects from being DDOS-ed with PR reviews since using AI costs real money.
It's been stated like a consultant giving architectural advice. The problem is that it is socially acceptable to use llms for absolutely anything and also in bulk. Before, you strove to live up to your own standards and people valued authenticity. Now it seems like we are all striving for the holy grail of conventional software engineering: The Average.
This isn't just "making mistakes." It's so profoundly obnoxious that I can't imagine what you've actually been doing during your apparently 30 years of experience as a software developer, such that you somehow didn't understand, or don't, why submitting these PRs is completely unacceptable.
The breezy "challenge me on this" and "it's just a proof of concept" remarks are infuriating. Pull requests are not conversation starters. They aren't for promoting something you think people should think about. The self-absorption and self-indulgence beggar belief.
Your homepage repeatedly says you're open to work and want someone to hire you. I can't imagine anybody looking at those PRs or your behavior in the discussions and concluding that you'd be a good addition to a team.
The cluelessness is mind-boggling.
It's so bad that I'm inclined to wonder whether you really are human -- or whether you're someone's stealthy, dishonest LLM experiment.
More context/discussion on this: https://discourse.julialang.org/t/ai-generated-enhancements-...
(Honestly, that's a lot more patience than I'd be able to give what are mostly AI-generated replies, so kudos to these folk.)
When confronted about LLM writing completely broken tests the guy said the funniest thing: "It knows what it’s doing but tends to be… lazy."
I'm a big fan of LLMs but this guy is just a joke. He understand nothing of the code the LLM generates. He says things like "The LLM knows".
He is not going to convince anybody to merge is PRs, since he is not even checking that the tests the LLM generates are correct. It's a joke.
In a submission to OCaml, when asked why the files he submitted list someone else as an author he says,
I find that sort of attitude terrifying.° https://github.com/ocaml/ocaml/pull/14369#issuecomment-35573...
I cannot believe it's not trolling
Yeah, either this guy's totally insane or it could even be somebody who's an AI skeptic who's just flooding projects with really dumb PRs just to show the risks and get people skeptical about the use of AI in open source (Takes on my folie hat)
That is a curious take. Open source projects were flooded by dumb PRs before AI too, so what would it prove?
Intentional or not its an interesting social experiment.
that's a grifter doing grifting. there was a thread on /g/ about this guy the other day, anons digged out much of its past as a failure / grifter in many areas, running away with the money at the first problem
I'd be willing to put money that before LLMs they were all in ok crypto
[0]: https://xkcd.com/221/
Among all the other problems with this... They describe [1] their contributions as "steering the AI" and "keeping it honest", which evidently they did not.
[1] https://discourse.julialang.org/t/ai-generated-enhancements-...
As an aside, he originally titled the thread "A complete guide to building static binaries with Julia (updated for 1.12)", with no mention of AI. That got me excited every time I opened the Discourse, until I remembered it was this slop. :/
Similar things on the OCaml forums. He has a post titled “Dune: concurrent builds are here!” but really it’s a +967 -100 slop PR that had to be closed
Maybe this guy is it: the actual worst coder in the world
Well that's the origin story for the main character on Solo Leveling, so...
Actually, I probably shouldn't make this comment publicly. It could cause another 3-5 programmer-isekai anime series.
A question I only dare to ask myself in these times of LLM: Is this even a real human being or already an instance of an ‘agentic system’?
Lot of people are criticising this guy but we all benefit from having an example to show people - this, please don’t do what this guy is doing. Please read the generated code, understand it, edit it and then submit it.
If anyone’s answer to “why does your PR do this” is “I don’t know, the AI did it and I didn’t question it” then they need a time out.
I guess we now have the equivalent of cowboy builders but for software now. Except no one asked for anything to be built in this case lol.
The people of Jonestown collectively drank less kool-aid than all this.
I don't know whether to be worried or impressed.
I had $1000 in Claude credits and went to town.
Yes, I made mistakes along the way.
The biggest mistake, AI or not, is dropping a 10K+ PR. 300~500 LOC is how far one should be going, unless they're doing some automated refactoring. E.g. formatting the entire StaticCompiler.jl source. This should've been a distinct PR, preferably by a maintainer.
I've seen this in other places as well.
The bottleneck is not coding or creating a PR, the bottleneck is the review.
This ought to be automated using AI.
It could first judge whether the PR is frivolous, then try to review it, then flag a human if necessary.
The problem is that Github, or whatever system hosts the process, should actively prevent projects from being DDOS-ed with PR reviews since using AI costs real money.
> This ought to be automated using AI.
When the world is telling you to fucking stop, maybe take a moment and listen.
It's been stated like a consultant giving architectural advice. The problem is that it is socially acceptable to use llms for absolutely anything and also in bulk. Before, you strove to live up to your own standards and people valued authenticity. Now it seems like we are all striving for the holy grail of conventional software engineering: The Average.
I mean this with all sincerity, try doing this yourself.
The established projects are resistant to YOLOing their projects and running them on complete LLM autopilot.
You are proposing a completely different development style.
Fork Ocaml to Oca-LLM and Julia to Jul-AI and see how it goes.
I'm not trying to say that this is now projects ought to work right now.
I do think this is where we are heading, though.
No, existing open source projects are not ready for this and likely won't ever be.
It will start in the corporate world and maybe already has.
> This ought to be automated using AI.
...
> I'm not trying to say that this is now projects ought to work right now.
which is it?
It's both but the focus is on the future.
I agree with you.
Please don't tell me you actually spent $1000 on generating fake tests....
You've wasted other peoples time and mental energy with utter bullshit that you weren't even bothered to read yourself. Be more considerate in future.
This isn't just "making mistakes." It's so profoundly obnoxious that I can't imagine what you've actually been doing during your apparently 30 years of experience as a software developer, such that you somehow didn't understand, or don't, why submitting these PRs is completely unacceptable.
The breezy "challenge me on this" and "it's just a proof of concept" remarks are infuriating. Pull requests are not conversation starters. They aren't for promoting something you think people should think about. The self-absorption and self-indulgence beggar belief.
Your homepage repeatedly says you're open to work and want someone to hire you. I can't imagine anybody looking at those PRs or your behavior in the discussions and concluding that you'd be a good addition to a team.
The cluelessness is mind-boggling.
It's so bad that I'm inclined to wonder whether you really are human -- or whether you're someone's stealthy, dishonest LLM experiment.
It's truly astonishing to me that your account has existed since 2008 and you decided to pull this.
As a troll job for the lulz it is some amazing work. Hats off
[dead]