[throwaway7356]

> and grasp at every straw to combat it, which is a sane response

Attacking every open source maintainer who might use AI for the sin of having used AI because one hates AI is just abusive behavior, not "sane response".

What would the "sane response" be for people tired of the "AI is being forced down my throat and I need to combat it by attacking open source maintainers" side? Grasp at every straw to combat such behavior?

[mbgerring]

It looks like they’re being attacked because their mission critical software is suddenly experiencing regressions, and the evidence suggests those regressions are in part caused by AI.

The regressions are the issue. If the software was working as expected, no one would be coming after them for “the sin of using AI”.

[Sacho]

Their mission critical software has bugs in it - security issues, which the rsync maintainer is trying to fix. In his attempt, he introduced regressions*(maybe - because some of the reported regressions list exactly the security issue that is being fixed as their use case...). This happens every day to thousands and thousands of software projects. This is why we have pinned versions, release schedules, different release philosophies...none of this is new.

I don't understand what novel problem you think you've uncovered here.

[mbrumlow]

I thunk you are right. This is just the same old stuff. I think people are reacting because AI is doing something, and that something seems to be accelerating the process of software development. So what people are seeing is the same issues we have always had compressed into tiny time frames.

But there is good news, at least I think. AI is also moving processes ideas and safety guards along at a faster rate. The only real downside is right now, at least, the amount of code being created outside of our safeguards has accelerated much much faster. This has happened in the past with software, so I am not too worried.

[e40]

> Attacking every open source maintainer who might use AI for the sin of having used AI because one hates AI is just abusive behavior, not "sane response".

That's not what happened, and I think you know it. The number of LOC introduced in the last 2 versions of rsync is off the charts. And there are bugs. I've been in a situation like the author of that issue. Upgrade a package and things fall apart and it would be very, very expensive to debug it to file the appropriate bug reports... so I roll back to a known good version.

Yes, the language the person used wasn't the greatest.

IMO, this is a litmus test for how you feel about AI. For the people that hate it, it's just a big pile on and "I told you so" ... we don't have enough info about the author to know if they are anti-AI. We know they are against using AI in a BAD WAY.

[MuteXR]

The absolute bulk of the LOC introduced are docs and a unit test system. Let's not just make stuff up now.