• Ephera
    link
    fedilink
    23317 hours ago

    Tangentially related rant: We had a new contributor open up a pull request today and I gave their changes an initial look to make sure no malicious code is included.
    I couldn’t see anything wrong with it. The PR was certainly a bit short, but the task they tackled was pretty much a matter of either it works or it doesn’t. And I figured, if they open a PR, they’ll have a working solution.

    …well, I tell the CI/CD runner to get going and it immediately runs into a compile error. Not an exotic compile error, the person who submitted the PR had never even tried to compile it.

    Then it dawned on me. They had included a link to a GitHub Copilot workspace, supposedly just for context.
    In reality, they had asked the dumbass LLM to do the change described in the ticket and figured, it would produce a working PR right off the bat. No need to even check it, just let the maintainer do the validation.

    In an attempt to give them constructive feedback, I tried to figure out, if this GitHub Copilot workspace thingamabob had a Compile-button that they just forgot to click, so I actually watched Microsoft’s ad video for it.
    And sure enough, I saw right then and there, who really was at fault for this abomination of a PR.

    The ad showed exactly that. Just chat a bit with the LLM and then directly create a PR. Which, yes, there is a theoretical chance of this possibly making sense, like when rewording the documentation. But for any actual code changes? Fuck no.

    So, most sincerely: Fuck you, Microsoft.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      6
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      Commit with Co-authored-by: Copilot

      or maybe better --author=Copilot

      It would certainly help evaluate submissions to have that context

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      3010 hours ago

      dude. i feel that pain.

      i got a dev fired because they absolutely refused to test their changes before submitting.

      I’m not talking once or twice either. at least a year of that bullshit. i had to show my boss how many hours of wasted time it was taking me because I look at the code first, like literally anybody. Eventually boss pipd them and fired them but holy fuck i wanted to kick that douche in the groin every time i saw a pr with their name on it.

      next place I work I’m insisting on a build step success to assign a pr.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      4514 hours ago

      Surely you have to blame the idiot human here who actually has the ability to reason (in theory)

      • Ephera
        link
        fedilink
        67 hours ago

        Well, for reasons, I happen to know that this person is a student, who has effectively no experience dealing with real-world codebases.

        It’s possible that the LLM produced good results for the small codebases and well-known exercises that they had to deal with so far.

        I’m also guessing, they’re learning what a PR is for the first time just now. And then being taught by Microsoft that you can just fire off PRs without a care in the world, like, yeah, how should they know any better?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        15 hours ago

        ultimately the people responsible are the ones giving people tools that can be misused, you don’t hand a gun to a child.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        5114 hours ago

        You think the decision to build this bot like that was not made by a human? Its idiot humans all the way down.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          914 hours ago

          Of course but people selling/offering shitty tool options is not only expected, it’s guaranteed. I certainly do not understand this tendency to blame the machine or makers of the machine and excuse the moronic developer

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            02 hours ago

            Responsibility is shared. It’s not one or the other.

            Many people don’t know what they’re doing. That’s kind of expected. But a tool provider and seller should know what they’re doing. Enabling people to behave in a negative way should be questioned. Maybe it’s a consequence of enablement, or maybe it’s bad design or marketing. Where criticism is certainly warranted.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              02 hours ago

              Yes the only people ever to blame are everyone but the people who actually did a thing. That’s the same reason voters aren’t responsible for trump, Democrats are. /s

          • Ethan
            link
            fedilink
            English
            04 hours ago

            The person who uses the shitty tool is a moron. The person who makes the shitty tool is an asshole. At least in this case where the shitty tool is actively promoting shitty PRs.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            5
            edit-2
            13 hours ago

            Nono i agree with you, people like that cant be trusted with tying their shoes.

            I just wanted to point out that the system is the way it is because of “idiot human here who actually has the ability to reason”