Hacker News .hnnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | askl's commentslogin

Google Pixel phones also have this feature since at least 5 years. Spammers usually just hang up instantly.

reply


It's always different this time. It always will only take a couple more months or years. And then people move on to the next hype topic.

reply


> It cites information from the US Government that these IT workers can earn more than $300,000 a year

Doesn't sound that cheap.

reply


Can doesn't mean does

reply


Can happen sometimes. I down voted the comment after reading only the first sentence but then corrected it to an upvote after reading the rest. Not sure if many people have an attention span long enough to do something like this.

reply


Even noticing the sarcasm, it just seems a bit... unnecessary? It interrupts a discussion without adding much, so to me just seems snarky for no good reason.

reply


While I appreciate sarcasm in a time of privacy crisis, I agree. We come to hackernews for discourse and try to follow the rules to have better discourse and comments that only provide sarcasm work against that.

reply


Given his track record, spending should be at four trillion now, right?


Given githubs stance on AI "coding" it would be hypocritical to host the project on github.


So it's a fork based on principle ? I'm a slop hater as much as the next one but that really does seem petty.


Making a decision on principle is the opposite of petty, isn't it?


Yes, the location of the repo really doesn't mean much to me at all, complaining about it being hosted somewhere because of principle is certainly petty.


There's a bunch of commits that have "supported by AI claude." as well. Whatever that's supposed to mean.


the lesson here is dont put those comments into your commits. use the tools you want to write code and just use them. it's nobody else's business. if someone overuses AI (which is common) it's quite obvious anyway


> it's nobody else's business

Human origin certification is coming. It might be hard to enforce, but you should probably respect the intent if a project tries to enforce it.


Agreed. It's impossible to enforce a user to disclose whether their commit has any AI influence or output anyway. Hard forks like this are just a short-sighted reaction.

If the person behind this fork has been active in FOSS or commercial development at all in the last 3 years, The odds they've never come across undisclosed AI-generated code that looked reasonable has to be close to zero.


These "Co-Authored-By" messages are added automatically by Claude Code when it makes commits on its own, although you just need to instruct it not to do so.


It’s someone else's business when you want your works to have a relationship with the world. Or were you content with talking to nobody?


im required to disclose AI use in my own OSS projects on github? no, I'm not


Whether it's someone else's business that you're using AI does not require you to do anything in particular. This is a discussion on the relevance of motivations.


If it's programmed in assembly, it just wont compile for a different architecture.


> the feed is designed to waste your time

So instead you build a tool to waste other peoples time with auto generated tweets?

If I saw someone using a tool like this, I'd instantly block them.


Fair pushback. The connectors don't generate random content though, they turn things you're actually doing into drafts.

If you ship a feature on GitHub or publish a blog post, it writes a tweet about that specific thing. You still review and edit before it goes out.

If someone's using it to blast generic AI slop, yeah, I'd block them too. The goal is more like "I built something cool but forgot to tell anyone about it" not "fill the feed with noise."

That said, I get the skepticism. It's a real tension I think about a lot.


You are the product


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: