Lutris maintainer use AI generated code for some time now. The maintainer also removed the co-authorship of Claude, so no one knows which code was generated by AI.
Anyway, I was suspecting that this "issue" might come up so I've removed the Claude co-authorship from the commits a few days ago. So good luck figuring out what's generated and what is not.
Here's the thing. The more you use AI to generate your code, the less likely you are to fully review all of it, understand what it's doing and be able to fix it when bugs or exploits appear, or even know that they exist. So sure, it might work for now but what about in a couple of years of vibe coding it?
Then... we only use the versions that work. And someone can fork from there.
Would have been easier if the original dev(s) continued to work on it themselves, instead of sloppifying the code.
Isnt that just an issue of code reviewing? If your accepting subpar code from AI... you're probably accepting subpar code from humans...
slippery slope fallacy
It's not a fallacy if the slope actually is slippery.
Technical debt is a very real thing that has been around for a long time and is well documented.
AI code is not old enough for the technical debt to have really hit hard yet.
Yet it's old enough to declare so worthless that any inclusion damns the whole project.
Except, of course, that this not an imagined or even unlikely outcome; so, no, by definition your link fits not apply.
Maybe read what you link???
'It works fine now, but what about after years of this very recent development?' is absolutely imagined.
You wanna argue for it? Argue. Don't posture.
It doesn't work fine now, though; that's the whole point. Vibe coding has resulted in numerous public failures, many of them costly. All avoidable.
The tech debt involved is not some imaginary thing. A bullshit generator on steroids giving you magic coding power is, however, completely imaginary.
And telling someone else "don't posture"?!? Then explain YOUR argument! Are you for real?!?
(╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻