louiereedersonMar 25

90% of Claude-linked output going to GitHub repos w <2 stars

https://www.claudescode.dev/?window=since_launch

Claude's Code

Global dashboard tracking the coding activity of Anthropic's Claude Code agent.

Show threadAurornis

Perfect example of a base rate fallacy - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Base_rate_fallacy

What percentage of GitHub activity goes to GitHub repos with less than 2 stars? I would guess it's close to the same number.

Base rate fallacy - Wikipedia

Mar 25 at 8:45pmWeb
Show threadlevocardiaMar 25
My reaction as well -- I have a few dozen public repos of 100% human-written code, most are 0 stars!
Show threadnickcwMar 25
The first thing I do when I make a new repo is star it myself ;-)
Show threadImustaskforhelpMar 25
https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/obama-awards-obama-a-medal
Obama Awards Obama a Medal | Know Your Meme

Obama Awards Obama a Medal refers to a humorous photoshop of an award ceremony photograph in which the former United States President Barack Obama awards t

Know Your Meme
Show threadsleepybrettMar 25
I have a few dozen org repos, of course none of them have stars, who stars their corporate repos?
Show threadblitzarMar 25

> who stars their corporate repos?

workers on the management track

Show threadtloganMar 25
The actual number is that 98% have less than 2 stars (0 or 1). About 90.25% has zero stars.
Show threadwetoastfoodMar 25
How do you know that?
Show threadtloganMar 25
https://ghe.clickhouse.tech/
Everything You Always Wanted To Know About GitHub (But Were Afraid To Ask)

Show threadBratmonMar 25
[flagged]
Show threadhluskaMar 25
Are you embarrassed? If not, you should be. This is absolute trash.
Show threadLevitzMar 25
It is relevant because if the vast, vast majority of repos have 2 or less stars then it's not that weird that a great deal of repos linked are, too, 2 or less stars.
Show threadZeWakaMar 25

I think this is useful in answering the grandparent comment's question:

stars : uniq(k)

1 : 14946505

10 : 1196622

100 : 213026

1000 : 28944

10000 : 1847

100000 : 20

Show threadnikcubMar 26
interesting that you only need ~150 stars on a project for it to be in the top 1%
Show threadjwpapiMar 25
You should check recent commits, because obviously there are a lot of forked 0 star repos.
Show threadttulMar 25
Yeah. Most of my public repos have 0 stars. Most of what I write sucks.
Show threadJoel_MckayMar 25

Yeah, but knowing something sucks means you are probably reasonably competent at coding. =3

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

Dunning–Kruger effect - Wikipedia

Show threadracl101Mar 25
+1 star for ttul
Show threadrunarbergMar 25

There is still a sampling bias if you compare blanket human written repos. I would guess people are far more likely to share their homework assignments, experiments, hackathon results, weekend toys, etc. as a public repo if they put some amount of work into it. I would guess minority of those would get any stars at all. If the whole thing was generated by AI in less then 20 minutes, I would guess they are more likely to simply throw it away when they are done with it.

Personally I think comparing github stars is always going to be a fraught metric.

Show threadzahrevskyMar 25
Off topic, but it reminds me of another principle: every geographic heatmap is just a population map. https://xkcd.com/1138/
Heatmap

xkcd
Show threadjamesfinlaysonMar 26
Yep, every time I see a heatmap of Australian lotto winners - very high correlation with Australia's population.