[agentultra]

Maybe you want to resist normalizing the use of GenAI for programming?

I know my personal choice doesn’t make much of a difference but I refuse to own a car. I advocate at my local city council to remove car storage from streets, remove parking minimums, add better transit, make the core of our city car-free. It sometimes feels easier to join in and just accept that this is the way of the world but I refuse to believe in inevitability: building cities for the benefit of cars is a choice.

Maybe some folks want to avoid AI code because they don’t want to make that choice?

I can’t say for them. But I do know there’s no sense pretending like they don’t have a point or feigning shock that someone might not have the same view as you do.

[mexicocitinluez]

Are you intentionally misreading my comments?

I asked a simple question: What technical concerns could possibly exist if the code is good?

I made it very clear I wasn't talking about personal, political, or ethical arguments.

> But I do know there’s no sense pretending like they don’t have a point or feigning shock that someone might not have the same view as you do.

Where am I feigning shock? Are you reading the right comment thread before you're replying?

[agentultra]

> That's what I can't for the life of me figure out. Bad code is bad code regardless of who is writing it. Adding a disclaimer about how it was written is meaningless.

Maybe I was reading too much into this part of your comment.

Plenty of folks don’t separate the ethical, political, or moral from the technology. For them using it is condoning it. Like for me, owning a car is contributing to car culture. It might be inconvenient for me or seem backwards to others but it’s worth resisting. They want to know that something was written with AI so they can avoid supporting AI or condoning its use.

[mexicocitinluez]

That's fair. I guess at that point I think adding a label to the repo as opposed to the commit would make more sense to me.