The AI hype-cyclone is bad, but so is the anti-AI witch hunt. Commits co-authored by Claude do not mean that a project has "abandoned engineering as a serious endeavor"
Would we say that accepting contributions from new developers means we've "abandoned engineering as a serious endeavor"? No.
Claude can write wrong code. New contributors can write wrong code. What matters is what you do with that code after it's been written.
@nedbat If this is in response to my toot about the CPython repo on GitHub, may I take the opportunity to respond?
If not, I apologize for interrupting.
@nedbat Appreciated, thank you. And yes, I realize that was a reply; I read that as coming from a place of frustration (a place I share, for what it's worth) rather than a literal statement.
That said, and to the direct point that you made, I don't think that calling out the use of AI products is a witch-hunt. AI is an effort to undermine labor and enclose common infrastructure, and I believe it is a fair thing to believe that there's a proactive duty to resist the adoption of AI products.
@nedbat Something can be sincere without being literal? Frustration is a very valid emotion, to be sure, and watching tools that have *zero* appropriate uses being included in open source projects is a deeply frustrating thing to see.
With respect to the core team, I understand, which is why I was clear to point out that this is a systemic issue. The engineering standards set by Python cannot be completely upheld no matter how competent the core team is so long as PSF *policy* allows AI.
Ned Batchelder
Cassandra is only carbon now