zlacker

>>freeto+(OP)
How does this not lead to a situation where no honest person can use any AI in their submissions? Surely pull requests that acknowledge AI tooling will be given significantly less attention, on the grounds that no one wants to read work that they know is written by AI.

>>hodgeh+d5
Good point. That's the point exactly. Don't use AI for writing your patch. At all.

Why are you surprised? Do companies want to hire "honest" people whose CVs were written by some LLM?

>>KritVu+Gd
I don't know if future generations will agree with this sentiment, in which case we lock ourselves out of future talent (i.e. those that use AI to assist, not to completely generate). The same arguments were made about Photoshop once upon a time.

> Do companies want to hire "honest" people whose CVs were written by some LLM?

Unfortunately yes, they very much seem to. Since many are using LLMs to assess CVs, those which use LLMs to help write their CV have a measured advantage.