"I" create stuff all the time with AI Agents but am real uncomfortable claiming ownership over them. Others don't seem to have this problem though so /shrug

p.s. - in this case the commits are claude commits, even if they tell it not attribute itself you can tell because good commit messages were incredibly rare (even my own) until the last year or so when they started to look like entire pull requests

I think if the answer to "could I do this again without claude" is no then it is difficult to claim ownership.

If you're just adding endpoints to some web project and doing feature work then whatever, if you are "rewriting tree sitter in rust" which a lot of these posts seem to be I think it deserves some skepticism.

They often do! Of course the artist has creative liberty to make it work, similar to how LLM's will deviate from the spec.

Was your automated test suite also AI generated?

You probably could have avoided all criticism by simply writing the article yourself instead of publishing raw LLM output. If someone isn't willing to write about a project they made, it's usually an indicator that they spent an equal amount of effort on the code as well.

And why did you make a commit to remove em dashes? That seems odd.

For all the whinging about bugs and errors around here the software industry in general (some niche sub-fields excepted) long ago decided 80% is good enough to ship and we will figure the rest out later. This entire site is based on startup culture which largely prided itself on MVP moonshots.

Plus plenty of places are perfectly fine with tech dept and the AI fire hose is effectively tech debt on steroids but while it creates it at scale it can also help in understanding it.

It is is own panacea in a way.

I think it is gonna be a while before the industry figures out how to handle this better so might as well just ride the wave and not worry too much about it in software.

Still software is not medicine even if software is required in basically every industry now. It should more conservative and wait till things settle down before jumping in.

Making big changes like the tech that underpins your product while still actively developing that product means a lot of things in a complicated system changing at once which is usually a recipe for problems.

Incidentally I think that is part of the current problem with AI generated code. Its a fire hose of changes in systems that were never designed or barely holding together at their existing rate of change. AI is able to produce perfectly acceptable code at times but the churn is high and the more code the more churn.

Yeah... my career hasn't been that long but I've only ever worked on one system that wasn't held together by duct-tape and a lot that were way more complicated than they needed to be.

They are not super helpful fixing it either.

I mostly like their use of an immutable OS as base layer for the virtualization - despite the limitations it sometimes has.

I liked it when I used it, but it wasn’t really a fit for our environment from what i’ve seen.

Generally a sysadmin needs to know "is there an action I can do to correct this" where as a dev has the power to alter source code and thus needs to know what and where the system is doing things.