6
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 29 Apr 2026
6 points (100.0% liked)
General Programming Discussion
9880 readers
7 users here now
A general programming discussion community.
Rules:
- Be civil.
- Please start discussions that spark conversation
Other communities
Systems
Functional Programming
Also related
founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
Well, you asked for our opinions, that was mine.
That still looks like closed source though, and these days folks view such things with suspicion, especially for small projects that are generally foss. There's a lot of people unwilling to run stuff they view as heavily AI authored, or potentially malicious, and not having the source out front to look at is going to put some folk off.
But as I say, it's just my opinion. Hope it works out for you.
Just to understand you better — what counts as ‘AI‑authored’ for you?
Ah, so it is. Now I understand why you're not putting the code up front on the github project page for everyone to see.
For me, that means something where the code is obviously AI authored.
I'm not anti-AI, I use it all the time when coding. But when the human responsible for that code, and there must always be one, doesn't understand every single line of that code and why it's there, then it's unwise to use that code. LLMs can churn out perfectly good code within their current scope, but they cannot (yet) produce cohesive and maintainable code that doesn't grow out of scope. And when an experienced coder sits down and reviews that code, there will be a high WTF/minute ratio.
For me the closed‑source vs source‑available vs open-source choice is mainly about learning distribution models, not about AI‑authored code. I wrote and understand the code — I just wanted to test a model that allows distribution and PWYW, which open‑source doesn’t really support.