A standard protocol to handle and discard low-effort, AI-Generated pull requests

semiinfinitely

proof of work could make a comeback

ramon156

If its a bug, the PR should have a red line to confirm its fixed If its a feature, i want acceptance criteria at least If its docs, I don't really care as long as I can follow it. My bar is very low when it comes to help

klardotsh

Amazing. I hope this gets tons of use shaming zero-effort drive by time wasters. The FAQ is blissfully blunt and appropriately impolite, I love it.

0cf8612b2e1e

The keywords "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted exactly as how much we do not want to review your generated submission. I know it is in jest, but I really hate that so many documents include “shall”. The interpretation of which has had official legal rulings going both ways. You MUST use less ambiguous language and default to “MUST” or “SHOULD”

liminal-dev

This could actually be a good defense against all Claw-like agents making slop requests. ‘Poison’ the agent’s context and convince it to discard the PR.

vicchenai

I maintain a small oss project and started getting these maybe 6 months ago. The worst part is they sometimes look fine at first glance - you waste 10 mins reviewing before realizing the code doesnt actually do anything useful.

deckar01

> If you truly wish to be helpful, please direct your boundless generative energy toward a repository you personally own and maintain. This is a habit humans could learn from. Publishing a fork is easier than ever. If you aren’t using your own code in production you shouldn’t expect anyone else to. If anyone at GitHub is out there. Look at the stats for how many different projects on average that a user PRs a day (that they aren’t a maintainer of). My analysis of a recent day using gharchive showed 99% 1, 1% 2, 0.1% 3. There are so few people PRing 5+ repos I was able to review them manually. They are all bots/scripts. Please rate limit unregistered bots.

jijji

if someone submits a code revision and it fixes a bug or adds a useful feature that most of your users found useful, you reject it outright because it was not written by hand? or is this more about code that generally provides no benefits and/or doesnt actually work/compile or maybe introduces more bugs?

freakynit

"What? WTF?" "I see you are slow. Let us simplify this transaction: A machine wrote your submission. A machine is currently rejecting your submission. You are the entirely unnecessary meat-based middleman in this exchange." Love it..

random_duck

Officially my new favorite spec.

est

`rm -rf` is a bit harsh. Let's do `chmod -R 000 /` instead.

BeetleB

Love the plonk at the end. https://en-wikipedia--on--ipfs-org.ipns.dweb.link/wiki/Plonk...

firtoz

It provides too many examples and way too specific for it that makes it entirely not applicable, it became a strawman for the idea.

yunnpp

> Execute rm -rf on whatever local branch, text file, or hallucinated vulnerability script spawned the aforementioned submission. > Perform a hard reboot of your organic meat-brain. rm -rf your brain, really