Heh, from the kernel patch: https://lore.kernel.org/all/CALCETrXbj__SFQMzPZhES5y6-sh4np-...
> I saw a fun bug report in ripgrep and a studious but pretty bad AI-generated analysis
Referring to https://github.com/dfoxfranke/ripgrep-3494-analysis which I indeed thought "that's an awful lot written to have been written by a human."
Looks like that thread is from...today!
Until ~2000, "cellphone user in public" equated with "smug asshole." We're at that icky rejection stage with AI.
Two years ago, that writeup would have been viewed as a generous gift of time to the community. Now we can't be bothered to read through it because we know where it came from, and that it's just worth $0.06 in tokens. Another reason (I think) is because we know what it portends.
In a few years, digging manually through bugs will probably be a last resort. We'll go from sneering to yawning at the reports, as another AI agent reads them and verifies the fix. Just like we ignore compiler-generated assembly code and people on their cellphones.
That was a tough read, but in all the verbiage I do not see it identifying the same code or area as the real genuine human on lore.kernel.
For those who can understand Claude better than me: did it anywhere actually identify the issue?
Assuming Andy (the mailing list post) is right, no it didn't.
I know this because he said so here in this comment section: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49134550
That said the AI was sort of directionality right... it identified roughly the right code.
Thanks for the fun read.