looks like an amazing project to support
https://codeberg.org/NerdNextDoor/vim
https://mastodon.social/@mrmasterkeyboard/116192873098653079
Why do you say it's an amazing project? Looks to me like someone copied vim, and according to the commits did nothing useful other than changing some text in a few files. The author's comments are all about coming up with a cool name for it, and what "cool" new features to add. I don't see any plan on actually making this a viable competing project. I don't see the author having much credentials in leading a project of this caliber either.
Before anyone misunderstands my comment, yes anyone not liking AI should stop using vim, I very much agree. And there are two viable ways forward:
This project is not one of them.
Where is the author's plan to tackle the 1600 issues that vim has open? How do they address the fact that vim has hundreds of commits each month, and literally had 68 contributors in just the last month? In the past month they closed 66 issues with vim. Half of vim's codebase is written in vimscript, and the other half in C. The new lead maintainer, I quote: "thankfully i know some C, but not vimscript". They know some C and no vimscript? So how do they plan to develop this project?!
Another quote: "removing old targets, stripping away graphical stuff (who uses this in graphical mode anyways? everyone uses it in the CLI...", and they already plan to drop Windows support. Already ignoring user's needs and removing functionality. Now, they are perfectly entitled to do whatever in their fork. But how is it a viable competitor to vim in any way?
Even assuming the worst case scenario on what damage AI can do to the progress of vim's development, who can seriously suggest that 1 person who doesn't even know the relevant programming langagues can make a better project than hundreds of experienced contributors that are doing it for years, AI or not?
And again, all the power to them, they can have some fun with their fork. But it's ridicoulus to suggest it as an alternative. Two years from now, vim will have fixed ~1500 issues at the current rate. And will have a bunch of new ones due to AI. Meanwhile this project will be dead, and the latest version will have 1500 unfixed issues that are all fixed in vim.
Taking a stance again AI in vim? Do it, campaign for it, talk to the maintainers, effect change, review PRs and comment about the AI mistakes you see, submit bug reports for bugs caused by AI and make a case for forbidding it's use. You have my full support. This fork? It's obviously going nowhere, it's a waste of effort that could be used to actually stop AI.
Yeah. You may as well just download a release tagged before he AI stuff is added.
Forking open source code is never a waste of effort. That's literally the reason why open/libre source exists, to have work all done in the open and if some people fundamentally disagree with the work being done, they can start a new workstream.
Of course they can, and I underline that in my comment several times, that this person is free to do it, good for them. I don't disagree with that at all. I'm sure they will learn a lot and that's great.
And everyone else is free to evaluate the prospects and realities of that fork.
Yes, a Spite Fork. Those are always well maintained, drama free and stable open souce communities
What infuriates me is that you've got this whole class of people who never contributed shit to the project, don't support it financially, probably don't even submit bug reports for it. But they'll spend some energy to spite-fork it. Energy they always refused to spend acutally helping, now they'll be happy to spend it to contribute negatively to the project.
I guess that's par for the course in this ultra-individualistic timeline but it makes me so fucking sad.
Wait, so because vim is allowing code written with AI we are switching to a random fork? The mental gymnastics here are insane once again. Is someone assuming that the vim maintainers are gonna do agentic requests? How is this project gonna handle upstream changes into their own main? Cherry-picking only "confirmed human-only" commits? Decisions like that out of spite, with zero thoughts and just out of principle do not help against slop. You're just adding human slop to the AI slop.
I'm sad I hate to scroll this far to see a sane take. Bad code is bad, AI accelerating the destruction of the planet is bad, but experienced maintainers using the tools that exist is not bad, and trying to fork a project like Vim because of that is insane. Power to them if they actively maintain it, but I don't see that in the cards.
What mental gymnastics? I've already installed EVi on my dev VM, seems to work fine. Problem solved, as far as I'm concerned, and I'm glad to lend my public voice in support of a slop-free fork.
Of course it works fucking fine if it's a hard fork of a stable state.
What mental gymnastics? The ones you're doing right now. You have not answered a single question from my comment. And what "problem" did you solve exactly? Has there been any issue that has come up because of the acceptance of AI in vim? What kind of "slop" is actually there that makes vim problematic for you?
People vibe coding random bullshit ideas because they now can, do indeed produce slop. A bunch of highly experienced devs working on a successful project for years using tools that are at their disposal properly is not slop. You're lending your public voice to a split of the community and of the project for made up bullshit reasons based on no objective proof but claims of slop and out of principle.
I'd trust the original vim maintainers to decide what's a good or bad pull, instead of a bunch of random people who simply hard forked for literally no reason.
You don't get to tell other people how to do their activism. THAT's bullshit. And you don't get to tell other people what is or is not slop. I don't use projects with LLM-coded contributions, which I definitely do call slop, if I can help it. This was an easy problem to solve: compile an AI-free fork, alias vim=evi, and boom done.
I've never told anyone how to do their activism, I've criticized the consequences of said activism, which I still haven't got answered, and the lack of objective arguments for this specific instance of activism, which I still haven't heard, except for "AI bad lol".
I've been rolling with the definition of slop that's kinda universally agreed on, that is low quality, spammy AI generated content, and I'd ask again for an example of that in vim, but since your definition is "LLM used = slop", I don't need to do that here I guess. Also, you've missed the irony of telling me to not tell people what slop is, while telling me what slop is right after.
I don't understand how you can be so dense to call that an easy problem that's just boom done. It's not about compiling and aliasing it, you can do that on probably any commit of vim. It's about the maintenance and longevity of the fork, who's gonna support it, and will it have a proper level of maintenance that will make it productively usable in the long term? It's been forked to a "pre-AI" state of vim, how is it known that it's not having LLM generated (as in LLM assisted) content already, before the official guidelines have mentioned that? If all that makes evi stand out is a strict no-ai policy, how is this gonna be checked and enforced (e.g human developer uses LLM tooling on his local machine, without disclosing it)? Who are the developers behind it, greetings from xz and similar supply chain attacks? How are upstream changes and fixes handled, since you'll use it at some point with elevated privileges or to edit sensitive files? But yeah, fuck all of that, it compiles and you can just alias it, right, so we can talk about the severe problems in the open issues - will vim script be renamed too, and we need to rename vimrc to evirc asap, and boom done.
I've said it here at some point already, screeching "AI IS BAD REEEE" is not helping the case, it's discrediting the "movement" or "activism" as a whole. AI will not leave. When the bubble bursts, people will stop shoving it everywhere, but it will stay where it can be used properly. Software engineering is something where it CAN be used properly, since whatever you're building doesn't give a flying fuck about who's been writing the code. It's either good, or it's bad. Instead of worthless decisions on principle, do better. Coach and talk with people on how to do better, how to live in a world with AI responsibly and for good. Avoid, boycott and fork the ones deciding to not do that, based on objective reasons, and build it better. That's what activism is about, using your actions to lead to change for the better, or isn't it? And I don't see how a hard fork, with all the mentioned consequences and problems, for the simple reason of vim maintainers saying "disclose AI usage" is leading to anything better just for the reason of shoveling an antislop and no-ai tag into the codeberg repository.
slop-free fork
Based on what, exactly? I work with real people who write very sloppy code. If you're trying to make a statement by switching away from vim, why not go to emacs, nano, or sublime?
The mental gymnastics is trusting a completely unknown person more than an LLM. LLMs are about as trustworthy and competent as the average person. In my book, that puts them far below reputable developers (like Moolenaar), but far above complete randos like the EVi dev. At least the LLM is somewhat predictable, but people can be crazy.
Wait, so because vim is allowing code written with AI we are switching to a random fork? The mental gymnastics here are insane once again.
What Lemmy community did you think you were in?
One where we critically discuss issues with and around AI, but it seems we're just chanting "AI bad" in a circlejerk.
Wait, what the fuck? vim has LLM shit in it now?!?
As far as I understand, they are allowing usage of LLM for developing on vim, aka adding features to the editor.
...motherfucker… -_- The only users I block are agentics.
Well, TIL. I’ll have to be more vigilant going forward. God, this era of tech fucking sucks.
Probably a good time to consider helix or ki over vim
Why can’t projects adding AI just fork a new project with AI?? Call it vimai or something and let people choose it if they want it. Stop ruining things
Bro how am I gonna have time to go party with babes if I’m stuck at home coding this non-ai version bro the future is now man bro dude whoa
Better make an AI free fork of linux too then.
Can't have all those fancy 7.0 changes in my kernel because some dev used AI to check his code formatting before submitting a PR. I'll stick with my outdated fork thank you very much. Upstream fix for blatant CVE but the fix includes an AI comment? Nooooo thank you.
I mean its not like there's a reject button for pull requests or anything. Anyone could just submit AI slop and we'd never know. Not even from the blatantly failing CI tests.
Absolutely against AI coded garbage but trusting this person to pick up something as important as vim is also crazy. I’ll swap to another editor that has been tested and is a proven solution. Focus your knee jerk reactions so you don’t end up in another problem.
Wait what? Vim has AI now? Jfc
I think they’re saying before developers started using AI to write the code, not that there are ai features in vim.
That's why I use vs code. Definitely no vibe code in there lol There is no escape from micro plastics or AI it seems
Lol, lmao even
slop code in vim? really?? wtf
They call it... Slim.
I can't believe ai slop is in vim of all things, also there aren't any ai slop code in nano btw
IMPORTANT!!!
Your browser (Firefox and chrome) both have ai code in it! Even using librewolf there's still AI generated code!!!!
Your operating system KERNEL allows ai generated commits! Time to switch from Linux.
Any idea if Neovim is slop coded too?
this is why nano is superior
What a strange way to spell emacs
emacs is a fantastic operating system, it just lacks a good editor.
I believe you mean helix
Have bigger problems than this. If the code is reviewed and tested, I don’t care if it was written by a human or machine. Sometimes I feel like people don’t trust recording audio on tapes and praise the good old punch cards.
If the code is reviewed and tested, I don’t care if it was written by a human or machine.
That's a pretty big assumption there buddy.
If they didn't care enough to write the code, what makes you think they cared enough to review or test the code?
If they didn't care enough to write the code, what makes you think they cared enough to review or test the code?
Contributors =/= Maintainers.
If the maintainers didn't care enough to summarily reject anything AI-generated out of hand, what makes you think they cared enough to review or test the code?
Onward with the Butlerian Jihad! Down with vibecoding!
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.
