There are a handful of comments here rueing buggy behaviors. These days with nearly the same amount of effort to post a complaint you can delegate the task of reproducing the issue, diagnosing the root cause, and proposing a fix. Yes, it may incur a small to moderate cost, but it's a contribution to an open source project that apparently provides some value in return.
I think this is what the whole "AI killed software" fallacy came from.
>nearly the same amount of effort to post a complaint you can delegate the task of reproducing the issue, diagnosing the root cause, and proposing a fix.
Is the effort the same though?
And even it is the same, making a meaningful contribution to an open source project doesn't mean just fixing your problem, but you also need to stay in line with the contribution guidelines, the project's direction and many more, which takes much more effort than just vibe coding a version for yourself.
Building software for one and for a bunch are two different things. AI is good at the former and can be used for the later but not without much effort. Models will get better, true, but that doesn't mean we need less engineering, in fact we need more to stay up-to-pace with AI. Imagine everyone submitting a PR to fix a bug, how fast can you review it manually? And if you use AI to review/verify them, the cost just shift from person who submitted the PR to the open source maintainer.
That doesn't mean AI is bad but that we need new systems and rules.
Okay, I'll bite the bait. Assuming that I am a regular user (think gamer), I have a Windows PC, no dev tools, no AI subs or accounts, no GitHub. How specifically can I do the steps required to propose the fix they way you suggest?
I'm not the person you are replying to, and I am with you. I disagree with the suggestion it's trivial to reproduce, diagnose, and fix a bug.
But at https://obsproject.com/help we see OBS has a Discord (regular gamer), a Forum, a Feedback page, and a Mastodon.
How did you end up on Hacker News?
address bar
paste a link to this HN article and then your comment into your favorite LLM, it will be happy to guide you.
Sir, this is a Wendy's..
[dead]
> There are a handful of comments here rueing buggy behaviors. These days with nearly the same amount of effort to post a complaint you can delegate the task of reproducing the issue, diagnosing the root cause, and proposing a fix. Yes, it may incur a small to moderate cost, but it's a contribution to an open source project
That would violate OBS's rules - they disallow AI-written code (or write ups) being submitted. Additionally, if you put nearly the same amount of effort into it as a comment mentioning the original bug - i.e. not much effort - they say that may result in a project ban.
That's two fallacies at the same time!
* Appeal to personal responsibility;
* False equivalence.
I'll strike those off my bullshit bingo card.
"Appeal to personal responsibility" is not a fallacy. Get a different bingo card.
> "Appeal to personal responsibility" is not a fallacy.
It is one when you deflect criticism instead of addressing it. Maybe you should have read more than the first sentence after you googled what a fallacy is.
Fair chance not everyone here has the same skill set, motivations, predispositions, and so on and so forth.
I tend to agree with you, but why calling it "bullshit"? You can disagree and have a discussing without belittlering other people.
Out of interest- what is your recommended path for this? I mean the path of least resistance where I don’t even have to check out the code locally or similar.
Officially and unofficially, the most you need to do is create an Issue report with valid reproduction steps. You'd be surprised how quickly some issues get fixed just because someone finally provided the missing link in an Issue.
That's not even remotely true.
https://github.com/obsproject/obs-studio/blob/master/CONTRIB...
> All text and content submitted to our project, which includes code, descriptions, issues, and comments, must be human written.
> The use of GitHub Copilot and other assistive AI technologies is heavily discouraged.
> Low-effort or incorrect submissions that are determined to have been generated by, or created with aid of such systems may lead to a ban from contributing to the repository or project as a whole.
[flagged]