Comment by mtlynch

7 days ago

>In all seriousness, two months ago (January 2025), I (@kentonv) would have agreed.

I'm confused by "I (@kentonv)" means here because kentonv is a different user.[0] Are you saying this is your alt? Or is this a typo/misunderstanding?

Edit: Figured out that most of your post is quoting the README. Consider using > and * characters to clarify.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=kentonv

13 comments

mtlynch

Reply
kentonv  7 days ago

He is quoting from the project readme. I wrote all this text.

  • mdaniel  7 days ago

    Thanks for weighing in here

    If I might make a suggestion, based on how fast things change, even within a model family, you may benefit from saying Claude what. I was especially cognizant of this given the recent v4 release which (of course) hailed as the second coming. Regardless, you may want to update your readme to say

    It may also be wildly out of scope for including in a project's readme, but knowing which of the bazillions of coding tools you used would also help a tiny bit with this reproduction crises found in every single one of these style threads

    • kentonv  7 days ago

      I believe it's important to say when AI was used so heavily in building a library -- it would feel dishonest to me to claim I wrote it all myself. I also think it's just a pretty interesting thing to know about. So I think it belongs in the readme. (But I'm not making a moral judgment on what anyone else does.)

      It was almost entirely Claude Sonnet 3.7. I agree I should add the version to the readme.

      1 reply →

    • diggan  7 days ago

      > It may also be wildly out of scope for including in a project's readme

      The entire point of the repository seems to be to invalidate/validate the thesis if LLMs are good enough to be pair programmers right now. Removing it from the README makes no sense in that context.

      4 replies →