I hope we start to see some etiquette / conventions developed around this, especially for open source projects.
if I showed up to a dinner party with homemade cookies, my friends would be appreciative.
if I showed up with store-bought cookies, my friends would probably still be appreciative.
but if I showed up with store-bought cookies and tried to claim they were homemade, my friends would probably feel insulted. even if the cookies were amazing, they'd be overshadowed by my dishonesty about them.
the problem, of course, is that if we had some standard section in a readme for expressing the spectrum between "0% LLM output, entirely whittled by hand as a labor of love" vs "100% LLM output, human eyes have never actually looked at any of it" we'd have LLMs hallucinate that readme section, saying they were human-coded.
Then the more serious one of "do these cookies contain allergen X?"
Any of the answers "yes, no, I don't know" is OK, although the latter is irritating, but if you claim "no" when the allergen actually is present it's a disaster. Whether that's because you bought them and didn't look at the ingredients or made them yourself in a careless shared environment.
For code from the Internet there's the related question "how likely is this to contain security holes or data-loss bugs?" And being LLM-written currently makes that a lot more likely.
Likewise, if I show up with homemade cookies, after your friend asks "who are you and why are you in my house," if they then assume my cookies must be store bought and I probably wouldn't be able to have made them myself, I'd think them rather judgmental.
Will not argue, pro or against, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But this reminds me of the early 2000 interviews when every one was asking if you used Google search, and now we use "google it" as a verb.
There was a meme at one point with a dude at an interview answering that with something like this: If you google a recipe, it doesn't mean the food is done, you still need someone to cook it.
As for the "xx% LLM" or not, I would argue the same for "xx% Googled", "xx% Stackoverflow" "xx% Learned in school vs copied from the interned", "xx% actual development and engineering vs library importing and glueing".
So you're trying to get buy-in for a tool, when you yourself don't see the point in confirming it works? Those "tedious tasks" are software development.
Of course I'm using this. I have a homelab with 12 PI's, this tool helps me play with files between all of them, any way I want. Might not be the world changing usage you were hopping for, but for me it's enough.
> I have a homelab with 12 PI's, this tool helps me play with files between all of them
did you have your LLM write the Show HN description too?
because you've gone from "We started CallFS" and "our small team" to "I play with it in my homelab"
if this is a homelab-level project, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. but you should be careful not to mislead people, even unintentionally, about the stability/maturity of the project.
especially when the project involves data storage. vibe-coding a game is one thing, if it has bugs then you might miss a power-up or get stuck on a level with no way out. when a vibe-coded storage system has bugs, you're potentially losing or silently corrupting user data.
You're asking me if I use it, I'm telling you where and how I use it. Then you complain how I use it.
Listen, I can totally respect anyones opinion, but this discussion isn't bringing any benefits, it doesn't seem to be constructive at all.
I get it, you're dissatisfied with this project or whatever, and usually I do try to be very accommodating, as you can see I do engage, but at the same time, please understand, this, is an open-source MIT licensed project, it's not the next "save the earth project" and still, you're acting like you're the VC and already lost money on the investment. Like I have to prove some worth or something.
To answer your question, yeah, there were two of us working at this, for a while, then one lost interest, I thought it would still be fair to say "our small team".
As for the losing data or any other such things, great idea, I will add that there is always a possibility of losing data, just like with NTFS, with AppleFS, or any other FS no matter who developed it or supports it. But it is a good point.
As far as this comment thread goes, I will personally refrain from future comments, as I believe it doesn't serve any good purpose other than nit picking.
They’re clearly not complaining at how you use it, they’re calling out your misrepresentations. These are ethical issues and you should examine your own moral framework.
I hope we start to see some etiquette / conventions developed around this, especially for open source projects.
if I showed up to a dinner party with homemade cookies, my friends would be appreciative.
if I showed up with store-bought cookies, my friends would probably still be appreciative.
but if I showed up with store-bought cookies and tried to claim they were homemade, my friends would probably feel insulted. even if the cookies were amazing, they'd be overshadowed by my dishonesty about them.
the problem, of course, is that if we had some standard section in a readme for expressing the spectrum between "0% LLM output, entirely whittled by hand as a labor of love" vs "100% LLM output, human eyes have never actually looked at any of it" we'd have LLMs hallucinate that readme section, saying they were human-coded.