Yes, very strange. There's no problem with using AI to build your first app and leaving the generated comments in the code is fine. But the number of comments on this thread that begin "This is so cool" is very suspicious.
It doesn't seem wild to me that people would post "This is cool" on a ShowHN post. I did [here](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44265915), and as far as I'm aware, I'm not an AI.
Would you like more information about how to identify AI comments? (kidding)
"convert length string into an integer" is a machine generated comment?
I've been writing code for 15+ years, this made me laugh my ass off. Comments are great, I don't read comments but I write them for others, especially for open source code. Atoi may be something you and I and a whole bunch of others know but people who don't it's a fine comment. Relax! :)
That comment is a strong sign that this was AI-generated. LLMs have the tendency to leave superfluous comments even when the code is self-explanatory. In this case, strconv is a well-known stdlib package, and anyone reading this in their IDE would get the documentation for what it does. In fact, all of the comments in this function and in most of the file are redundant, and I would point this out in a code review.
But, of course, this was vibe coded, so it's unlikely a human actually reviewed it.
and some strings coming from crawled resources like: lengthi12345e4 but slightly different tokens (like 25 instead of 35 etc).
Gemini Pro 2.5 even gave me the prompt:
> If you asked me, "Generate Go unit tests for a Bencode decoder function called Decode that takes an io.Reader and returns an interface{} and an error. Cover strings, integers, lists, and dictionaries, including common error cases and nested structures" the output I would strive to produce would look very much like the code you've shown.
> It's a good example of well-written Go tests, and that's the kind of pattern I've learned to recognize and replicate.
and a lot actually matches when you ask from a fresh conversation.
So most likely Cursor + Gemini 2.5 Pro, but I cannot blame, I spend 100% of my time with Claude, and I take ownership of the code.
"TODO: We'll develop the actual functionality as we develop each component" lool
It's hard to say honestly. I don't call any project AI as it's just too hard to tell. I write lots of comments in my code too so it's hard to call anything AI without a person stating they used it.
Claude is decent for sure, but I always say with AI, learn the math before jumping to a calculator.
Yes, very strange. There's no problem with using AI to build your first app and leaving the generated comments in the code is fine. But the number of comments on this thread that begin "This is so cool" is very suspicious.
It doesn't seem wild to me that people would post "This is cool" on a ShowHN post. I did [here](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44265915), and as far as I'm aware, I'm not an AI.
Would you like more information about how to identify AI comments? (kidding)
Or like a go beginner, which is fine
Scanning around their other repositories the persons been programming for a few years now. There are ‘.cursor/rules’ directories in some recent repos.
I think it’s a reasonable hypothesis that “I wrote a BitTorrent client from scratch” may be “I produced a BitTorrent client from cursor”.
"convert length string into an integer" is a machine generated comment?
I've been writing code for 15+ years, this made me laugh my ass off. Comments are great, I don't read comments but I write them for others, especially for open source code. Atoi may be something you and I and a whole bunch of others know but people who don't it's a fine comment. Relax! :)
That comment is a strong sign that this was AI-generated. LLMs have the tendency to leave superfluous comments even when the code is self-explanatory. In this case, strconv is a well-known stdlib package, and anyone reading this in their IDE would get the documentation for what it does. In fact, all of the comments in this function and in most of the file are redundant, and I would point this out in a code review.
But, of course, this was vibe coded, so it's unlikely a human actually reviewed it.
In the tests it more obvious:
You can see here for example: https://github.com/piyushgupta53/go-torrent-client/commit/61...
and some strings coming from crawled resources like: lengthi12345e4 but slightly different tokens (like 25 instead of 35 etc).
Gemini Pro 2.5 even gave me the prompt:
> If you asked me, "Generate Go unit tests for a Bencode decoder function called Decode that takes an io.Reader and returns an interface{} and an error. Cover strings, integers, lists, and dictionaries, including common error cases and nested structures" the output I would strive to produce would look very much like the code you've shown.
> It's a good example of well-written Go tests, and that's the kind of pattern I've learned to recognize and replicate.
and a lot actually matches when you ask from a fresh conversation.
So most likely Cursor + Gemini 2.5 Pro, but I cannot blame, I spend 100% of my time with Claude, and I take ownership of the code.
"TODO: We'll develop the actual functionality as we develop each component" lool
It's hard to say honestly. I don't call any project AI as it's just too hard to tell. I write lots of comments in my code too so it's hard to call anything AI without a person stating they used it.
Claude is decent for sure, but I always say with AI, learn the math before jumping to a calculator.