upvote

points

by silverwind15 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby microtonal14 hours ago|
next
[-]
I feel like GitHub should have a system where you can give out tokens that are valid for e.g. 1 PR. If someone shows to engage in meaningful discussion and has a good idea to address an issue/feature, you initially give them one PR token. If the PR is of good quality, you can give them a few more, until they are contributors that can just create PRs as they like.

A similar system would be nice for issues, though I'm not sure what it'd look like if issues are the springboard for contributing PRs.

Not likely to ever happen (as others said), GitHub/MS want to sell CoPilot subscriptions/tokens and LLM-generated PRs are a part of that business model.

reply
upvoteby ZeWaka14 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
My community does something vaguely similar, where you get credit for having bugfix PRs merged, and it's deducted when you get feature PRs merged.
reply
upvoteby pbhjpbhj9 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
You could use a "OTP" to provide this: give out tokens ("OTP"), anyone with that token can submit, keep a record of the user (eg github username, email address) and token, run a bot to delete submissions that don't have a valid token, check the token+user pair, if there is a mismatch blacklist the user that token was given to whilst removing the PR.
reply
upvoteby sdsd5 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
If only there were a simple way to make tokens that weren't fungible and could be given to others

/s

reply
upvoteby hiccuphippo14 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
GitHub has not incentive for blocking AI. It's like asking an ad company to build an adblocker into their browser.
reply
upvoteby rvnx13 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
It's called Brave
reply
upvoteby smaudet13 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Which is not chrome and still has ads...(Ironically).

The issue here is the core model is broken (misaligned incentives). That's not something you are going to fix with a github "downstream". A token system could help but it's easy to imagine ways that could be gamed, if not implemented well.

reply
upvoteby rvnx12 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Ads are the main business model of browsers.

If search ads are blocked on search engines, then there is no revenue for the browser. It's that simple (on top of that Brave has other revenues, but the majority is search ads).

So it's a game of hoping that the majority won't change the default.

This is the main reason Brave does not block search ads specifically by default, but still block the other ads. Blocking the other ads there are no consequences, since anyway this revenue is not shared back to the browser.

This is why the business model of Brave is cynical.

-> It's the same model as AdBlock and the "Acceptable Ads" (block all ads, except the acceptable ads, unless you disallow them)

reply
upvoteby marginalx14 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Problem is the bots can create any number of github accounts and continue spamming. Though this would be a good simple defense to start with.
reply
upvoteby godelski3 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
I've gotten tons of spam on repos that were purely ml research code. Things I saw copy pasted over hundreds of repos.

  > Maybe GitHub should temporarily block accounts from raising PRs if like 95%+ of them are getting rejected.
It's so bad I'd be okay with a lower bar where it's flagged if they're posting the same message over multiple repos... FFS they aren't even stopping this shit https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47964617
reply
upvoteby cdrnsf14 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
GitHub and Microsoft are actively contributing to the problem, why would they admit fault?
reply
upvoteby avs7332 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
It seems like some better basic metrics should be made front and center with PRs in this day and age. Yes AI is the driving force behind the current crop of problems but there are other issues. Yes it’s accessible if you go look but the point is people don’t have time.

the rate of comits/PRs total

The rate of PRs to repos they don’t own

The reject rate of PRs

The number of ban

An estimated “AI” or bot score or status flag

There are a few better attempts at GitHub metrics calculators but I have not seen any that move beyond the paradigm of more vomits is default assumed good. It’s time to foreground quality not just quantity. The GitHub “4 kpis” are entirely action oriented.

reply
upvoteby moraesc9 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
[flagged]
reply