do LLMs destroy open source? (lemmy.zip)

submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by illusionist@lemmy.zip to c/opensource@lemmy.ml

34 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Here and there are posts about tailwind losing its revenue stream. And then people / post authors conclude open source is lost and spread FUD.

Do you think your projects die because of LLMs?

I only have public hobby projects, I am not afraid. I also try to donate to a lot of free software that I use or like.

E.g. this https://programming.dev/post/43810907 or https://programming.dev/post/45292081

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] michael@piefed.chrisco.me 19 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It burns you out pretty quick. I have a popular library and had to turn off gh issues. So many llm/fake bug reports. Huge waste of time and effort. Github has gone downhill.

[-] pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Github has gone downhill.

CodeBerg is really nice, has a free tier, and has guided tutorials for migration.

I moved my work out of spite for GitHub's warmongering parent company.

And then I was pleasantly surprised by how nice CodeBerg is.

[-] CrypticCoffee@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 week ago

Plus, probably filters out low value contributions. People on Codeberg are generally genuinely interested in a project and not chasing activity graphs/clout/CV padding.

[-] ageedizzle@piefed.ca 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

CodeBerg sounds great but this doesn’t seem like a longterm solution. If CodeBerg ends up getting really big then it will get overrun with slop as well. We need to find a way to cut the slop problem off at its source, but I have no idea how that could actually work.