You seem to be making a huge deal out of one person on the internet saying that they stopped programming in Rust because they felt that rust projects were getting dominated by LLM output

I didn’t make a huge deal out of it; I made one short comment (sincerely) asking if they were serious, and replied because it turned into a longer comment chain. I don’t think it’s a big deal. I am surprised that they weren’t joking and find their rationale ridiculous. And I separately take issue with the chauvinism expressed in another comment, but I don’t think the original comment is a big deal.

How did English become the most widely spoken language? Most certain through far more bloodshed than anything to do with the production of AI systems. If Rust’s association with AI is a reason to avoid using Rust, then yes, the social conditions surrounding English usage are sufficient grounds for a movement away from English as the lingua franca.

Anyway, like I said in my comment, you can replace “English” with any other language that LLMs speak fluently. I gave English as the example language because that is the language this forum is in. There are much less widely spoken languages that LLMs are also fluent in. Should users of those languages abandon their languages? I was responding to that person’s ridiculous reasoning.

Eza isn’t a reimplementation… it’s its own program. The name of the binary is also eza not ls. What OS are you using that uses eza instead of ls? I have both installed and have ls aliased to eza because I find the coloured output to be easier to read (much like syntax-highlighted code is easier to read), but I’ve never seen eza pre-installed on a system, not does it conflict with ls. Package managers let you install both. They’re different programs.

English is the universal language.

No, it isn’t. But ignoring the chauvinism there, okay, replace English with any other language that LLMs can speak.

How is it not?

Have you read the book? It’s a good read and it’s how I learnt. I went from knowing 0 Rust to knowing enough to start working on my projects. https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/

I feel like “I built” has a level of pompousness implied that I think is correlated with AI bros. I’d normally use a verb like “made”. I know it’s a synonym but it seems less tooting-your-own-horn in connotation. I don’t think I’ve naturally said in a sentence that I “built” a tool.

Before I get strawmanned, no I don’t think there’s anything wrong with saying you built something. I’m mentioning that there’s a minor difference in connotation that leads to one verb correlating with vibe-coding. That’s all.

What? Are you serious? A lot of LLM-generated text is in English too, let’s learn an obscure conlang and stop speaking English.

It does make me sad that Rust is getting so strongly associated with slop. Personally I find it a really fun language to actually program in. The language being expression-based is actually quite handy, and is a concept I wish existed in other languages too. But it is also unfortunately the most sensible language for vibe-coding too because of the performance and guardrails.

I mean in principle, stealing IP from big tech would be great, but do they have to have even the English written by AI? It writes in the most grating tech bro tone I have ever had the misfortune of reading. Can’t be bothered to write all the code, fine, but can you at least write the introduction to your project? Do you even not care about that?

It’s cool to see so many Geany users. How is it for an IDE? I use Gram atm and am quite happy, but it’s not really a fully-fledged IDE. I used to like JetBrains products but they’ve enshittified a lot, have always been slow memory hogs, and aren’t fully FOSS. Something like the power of JetBrains IDEs when they were good, but running natively instead of in the JVM, and fully FOSS, would be my ideal.

They aren’t specific about how the question was posed, no, but page 9’s wording does state that it is maintainer-estimated, and specifies the terms “low-quality” and “slop” as the qualifier for the 25% figure, so unless they’ve made a huge logical leap, I think it is reasonable to conclude that maintainers were specifically asked about low-quality AI-generated PRs (or “AI slop”). I think people are sensible enough these days to not deny that AIs sometimes produce acceptable code.

If you actually read the article, you’ll see that “slop” in the survey does not refer to AI-driven PRs in general, but to specifically low-quality AI-generated PRs. The % of PRs with AI-generated code would be higher. 25% of all PRs being low-quality AI-generated code is a lot.

They are slop according to the maintainers, which I would say should be the arbiter of that.

I would say to just require them to be tagged, but the volume of them seems quite high. Might be better to just ban them and they can create a separate community.

If the authors used the same method to improve GIMP, they’d be introducing a bunch of slop code to GIMP. This code is not going to be of GIMP quality.

I also doubt this will hold a candle to GIMP for the aforementioned reasons. It might appeal to a small audience, but I do not expect it to dethrone GIMP any time soon.

With syntax highlighting and everything. I suppose that’s an OF niche you could sell. Subscriptions come with programming support alongside feet pics.

I like rnote. It’s not super feature-complete, but it’s still really nice to use. Has an infinite canvas to write on, pretty clean UI/UX, has no problems taking my wacom tablet as input.

That’s where multi factor authentication comes in. Biometrics are something that you are. You also need something that you know.

I don’t particularly care in the abstract but this particular piece of software is also technically awful vibecoded slop. And DHH isn’t a random nazi, but a nazi with a platform provided by the popularity of his slopware.