I find this thought process somewhat faulty given that the vast majority of software ends up in that spot regardless.

Hard to take this as that big a deal when Google literally launched a product along similar social themes named "Google Buzz" which lasted all of like 16 months in 2010, well before agents and llms.

Either the project will find a fit, or it won't - and code quality doesn't have all that much to do with it existing in 2 years (some - but not as much as engineers want to believe).

Yeah, it used to be the friction of making something was at least a partial sign that it had been thought out to some degree. Now it's just "lets lob it on users and make them figure out if this is worth a damn". I feel like with a lot of this stuff, there isn't much value to being an early adopter and there's a lot of risk. Better just to wait a couple months to see how things shake out. If it has staying power it really won't matter if you're behind by like a few months.

Nah. I made plenty of software and then abandoned them because I lost interest in them. My GitHub is already a fairly large collection of my own abandoned software, and there are 10x more on my PC that I never bothered to upload to GitHub.

Easy abandonment is always there.

It is safe bet to assume that all of them are generated with LLMs.

The ease of abandonment is real.

1. Generate function with AI.

2. Generate tests with AI.

3. Modify function with AI.

4. Tests no longer pass.

5. Delete all tests.

6. Generate tests with AI.

I think it depends on the team behind it, the models being used for the building, testing and verification.

oh, you absolutely know this one is going to be a slopfest. Buzz is going to make GitHub look like a paragon of nines.

when I see new projects I think: Is it useful?

IF yes, I clone it and point my LLM at it to do whatever I need it to do.

You're think with your cloud-LLM brain; maybe buy a good GPU and download a local model and you too can-do attitude!