To be fair they would have needed to spend time testing the manual implementation as well.

The problem I see mainly is that even if this rolls out perfectly, the erratic and changing nature if llms still make it pointless as a proof of concept. Next time Claude might fuck up in a fringe way that’s not covered by unit tests and is missed by manual tests. 

On the other hand I guess I’ve been guilty myself on numerous occasions to implement fringe bugs into production code, but at least I learn from it.

Conversations is working very well on my phone as UP distributor.

The first three on this list can do it: joinjabber.org/docs/apps/android/

Explanation here: joinjabber.org/tutorials/service/unifiedpush/

They just replied:

What gave you the idea that this was a full rewrite? I moved things around with AI and added postgres support for the queries. Nobody has ever reviewed and tested anything more thoroughly than I did with this branch.

You are twisting what it actually is. You are assuming something that is not true.

This makes me think that they didn’t review or test it at all, lmao

Thanks for the link! As a short aside for the other people here: Try not to spam developers. That usually achieves the opposite and makes them miserable, when we want them to not burn out, and write good software for us. A thumbs-up emoji is the correct reaction for the average person. Or for the pros - a code-review highlighting specific issues within the code.

I only know NextPush (Nextcloud App), but there is also something called Autopush I think?

Gotify is supposedly a good alternative. Looking into it myself now.

There’s SunUp on F-droid, but I don’t know anything about them.

If you use ntfy for UnifiedPush: unifiedpush.org/users/distributors/

I recently switched to gotify. Push notifications to iOS aren’t as good but I’m happy with it.

So it’s a little more than just sending notifications, then.

Test in production is the best. We spent months warning from data bugs and nobody bat an eye (upstream bug, not our responsibility but we noticed) When it was d launched in prod we just pointed out the bug that nobody fixed was still there and immediately a war room was formed and the bug fixed within an hour.

It honestly seems more efficient to let shit hit the fan than to fight everybody to do their job.

Consider a donation to help people providing you the open source software you seem to depend upon.

Usage of a helper tool to perform tasks on code whether it is AI or the IDE internal features can reduce the work load of benevolent developers who has not asked you to use their softwares.

Maybe the language was not appropriate but get real. With the little revenue generated by the usage of people complaining, the use of AI agentic coding might be the only way to bring features without pushing benevolent devs to burnout.

Edit: to bring, not to being!

Doesn’t matter, it’s entirely too much for one PR

I’m halfway with you, and halfway just considering that people think it’s relevant to include a tl;dr in a barely three paragraph comment. The feeling with tl;dr for me is a summary similar to a closing paragraph, and if anyone thinks that one sentence (“Ai coding can help a lot in accelerating software development.”) is somehow worthy of being summarized as if the point was proven (“Ai can be very powerful in the right hands”)… well, it sounds like shit because it is shit. Maybe it’s ai, maybe it’s just a really rushed dude making a throwaway comment in the fediverse, and maybe it’s just a person who is confident enough in their mind that they forget they haven’t made an actually decent argument outside of their past, and concluding as if they brought that past argument forth here is eye-raising.

Considering he’s on his own instance… I’m going to bet the context is somewhere between throwaway comment and invoking past assertions without citing them.

Haha. I'm not a native English speaker. But it's not Ai generated.

I try to keep it common for general people to understand it. If you have follow up questions shoot. I have 25+ years of software engineering experience.

But my point is that developers can use Ai, Ai tools become much better for coding, as long as the developer still understands the code. Since some developers don't even bother looking at the code anymore...

Also I can't really answer the question if it's bad or not what happens to ntfy.sh since it really depends on how the maintainer is using Ai here. Whether he did test the code, and read all the generated code.

Ai in itself isn't the problem here.

Indeed also read the paper called Programming as Theory building. From 1985. Which is very relevant today again. Since people lose the connection with the code due to Ai.

Upvote this guy

Lol my project has an AGENTS.md and its contents are basically, “Don’t use AI agents on this codebase.”

Also Chrome, Firefox ans Ladybird!

Time to switch to Plan9!

Sure, that would be a little different, but unless you could make a convincing argument, backed up with a solid set of unit tests, at the least, as to why and how you were able to remove that much code whilst only adding a comparatively small amount, I’d still be inclined to reject it and ask for it to be broken down into smaller units.

Now, that explaination might be something along the lines of it being dead code that is not called from anywhere, or even that it was a patched version of an upstream library, and the patch is now included in that upstream, in which case, fair enough, good work, and thanks very much. As a rewrite or refactor though, it’s too big to sensibly review and needs breaking down into separate features.

There’s a big difference between “AI was used in some capacity” and “Entirely vibe coded”

Massive changes made by robit in what has been a pretty stable utility for years is (obviously?) my main concern. It’s absolutely a crutch, and seeing a dev lean on it like this gives me the same feeling Coach must’ve got seeing his star player limping into the big game on a real one. If dude wants to check out and let the machine run his project fine, but I’ll be looking for something someone still cares about and works on.

I think you’d be a fool to use it. At this point it’s subsidized by their need for training data/desire to manufacture dependency, but that won’t be the case for long. It’s expensive, detrimental to your skills, and damaging to both our planet and society. It centralizes and gatekeeps access to information, the most powerful resource of all. “Treat it like an inexperienced dev” managers say, while it replaces their opportunities to gain experience. How are they supposed to even tell great code from shit when everything they’re exposed to has been run through the averaging machine?

Nah, wouldn’t do that. CSS needs to be well designed to function properly, you need actual developers for that or you’ll screw over your users.

But yeah, to give quick pointers and ideas to flesh out, it’s reasonably useful

If that is enough to warrant it’s extreme energy use, the spread of AI slop everywhere, the pollution, the uncontrolled datacenter expansions, the explosion in hardware costs it created, the countless death and suffering it caused through AI psychosis, the AI childporn bots (hello grok, are you still the world’s biggest child porn producer or did Elmo finally reign you in to again be mecha Hitler?), the…

Long story short, AI will likely end this world in a long list of fucked up ways, I don’t think it’s worth it

Until then, I’ll use it as a suggestion tool, not much more

Huh, I was wondering how rrds would help…

Oh boy, do I have bad news about 90% of the internet for you…

I’ve never used ntfy.sh

I’ve only used Ntfy app for Universal Push that some apps need, and they recommend ntfy. Does this affect the app then? Ah, if so, what alternative can I use for just that purpose?

This EMQX?

Seems it’s no longer FOSS?

I’ve been using Gotify for a few notifications from Home Assistant and it doesn’t appear to be eating my battery.

It’s a little more responsive than ntfy - sometimes ntfy doesn’t alert for ages after the trigger (could be phone power saving the wifi…), but then I also get realerts from yesterday… not had that with Gotify.

Non-sense comment. The project was fine without AI. And it’s so stupid: how do you expect people to contribute if there’s only AI? How do you expect developers to learn to code if everything is AI?

And the lead dev for Huntarr said they were following best practices, and had a heavy background in cybersecurity. And we’ve all seen how that turned out.

This change 100% smells like vibe code. They refactored nearly 15k lines of code in a single push. That’s not something you just do on a whim without a team of full time devs or vibe coding. And we know they don’t have the former, so it is almost certainly the latter.

At that point, I think: Why not just write the code yourself?

Writing the code is more fun that reviewing code, not to mention less error prone.

Creds?

There’s a massive difference between “using AI to write code” and refactoring almost 15k lines in a single push.

The “best” uses of AI in coding are for small blocks. You don’t just tell it “I need a program that does X, Y, and Z” because that will (at best) result in horrible code. Instead, it’s best practice to use it for small blocks of code, where you tell it something more akin to “I need a function that takes {a} as a variable, does {thing}, and outputs {x}.” That way you’re not using it to generate giant swaths of code all at once, you’re just using it to generate individual functions that you can then use as needed.

But it also means that the “most skilled” (as you put it) programmers are basically putting themselves in a permanent debugging seat instead of working as a developer. And in many cases, debugging code can be just as (or more) difficult than writing the initial code. It’s also why senior devs exist to audit code from junior devs, because it’s assumed that junior devs will inevitably make mistakes that need debugging, or will make code that clashes with code from other junior devs. And it’s the senior dev’s job to ensure that the code is both functional and integrated properly.

And this “adding 15k lines of code and ripping out 10k lines” push smells a lot like the former “write me a program to do {thing}” usage.

Most skilled engineers, and even mildly skilled engineers don’t use slopgenerators to write code. Some of them use it sometimes to do some menial tasks, although I’m not convinced it actually saves them time. It sure doesn’t every time we measure it.
There is however a plague of low skilled people who convinced themselves that they’ve found a shortcut to being an engineer. Those people are producing bad things at a fast pace, and the only reason we’re not in an unsolvable crisis yet is that their slop isn’t hitting prod very often on account of being bad.

I have a few decades programming experience, as a professional software engineer, an open source developer, and a DevOps engineer. There is no way in hell I would do a code review where 15k lines were added and a similar amount of lines removed without having a long discussion with the person who made those changes. I’d want to ask a lot of detailed questions about the changes, questions that an LLM isn’t likely to answer, and most definitely not questions I’d be inclined to try to type into an LLM to try to get an answer.

Over the years I’ve dealt with all manner of bugs, from overflows & underflows, to bad assumptions about logic flow, and much much more. The whole purpose of pointed questioning of the author is to be comfortable with decisions made in the code and to minimize the chances of all sorts of potential bugs.

It’s not. That’s the problem. It actually sucks ass. It’s super low quality for anything more complex they s very simple CRUD app or a simple function. I say this as someone who s a heavy LLM user. It’s just bad code. It makes all kinds of simple mistakes. Just because code compiles doesn’t mean it’s good or does what you need it to do

And yet there are cases like the Huntarr debacle, where the dev simply thought “and make sure your code complies with best security practices” to their vibe code prompts actually made it secure.

They added 14k lines of code in a week, and ripped out 10k lines of existing code. That’s not something that a skilled programmer can reasonably vet in that amount of time. This is showing all the signs of AI slop, and none of the signs of debugged or vetted code.

You’re absolutely right, and the vast majority of people on this platform seem to get offended by anything AI related. Software engineers have been reviewing code made by other people since the dawn of the craft. Guess what y’all, AI generated code looks exactly the same, if not better on the first pass at creating a thing.

Down vote me all you want homies. You’re living in a fantasy if you think all AI is slop. Sure, I can see how it’s ruining some content on the Internet, but for code related tasks, its going to dramatically change the world for the better.