Give Django your time and money, not your tokens
Random
1
Posts
1
Posters
0
Views
-
This article really resonated with me.
https://www.better-simple.com/django/2026/03/16/give-django-your-time-and-money/
Especially this part:
> If you do not understand the ticket, if you do not understand the solution, or if you do not understand the feedback on your PR, then your use of LLM is hurting Django as a whole.
>
> Django contributors want to help others, they want to cultivate community, and they want to help you become a regular contributor. Before LLMs, this was easier to sense because you were limited to communicating what you understood. With LLMs, it’s much easier to communicate a sense of understanding to the reviewer, but the reviewer doesn’t know if you actually understood it.
>
> In this way, an LLM is a facade of yourself. It helps you project understanding, contemplation, and growth, but it removes the transparency and vulnerability of being a human.
>
> For a reviewer, it’s demoralizing to communicate with a facade of a human.Emphasis mine.
It puts into words exactly how I feel about the latest spate of AI generated content, and why I push so hard (sometimes offensively so) for the human behind the PR/work to be revealed. Part of it is standing up and owning the work produced, even if it was produced wholly or in part by AI, and part of it is ensuring that that peer that I want to talk to is actually capable of understanding the problem and solution.
Most fixes, every feature, and every PR adds maintenance burden to a project maintainer. If someone sends me a drive-by PR authored by AI, I have no idea whether the submitter intends to stick around.
Gli ultimi otto messaggi ricevuti dalla Federazione
-
This article really resonated with me.
https://www.better-simple.com/django/2026/03/16/give-django-your-time-and-money/
Especially this part:
> If you do not understand the ticket, if you do not understand the solution, or if you do not understand the feedback on your PR, then your use of LLM is hurting Django as a whole.
>
> Django contributors want to help others, they want to cultivate community, and they want to help you become a regular contributor. Before LLMs, this was easier to sense because you were limited to communicating what you understood. With LLMs, it’s much easier to communicate a sense of understanding to the reviewer, but the reviewer doesn’t know if you actually understood it.
>
> In this way, an LLM is a facade of yourself. It helps you project understanding, contemplation, and growth, but it removes the transparency and vulnerability of being a human.
>
> For a reviewer, it’s demoralizing to communicate with a facade of a human.Emphasis mine.
It puts into words exactly how I feel about the latest spate of AI generated content, and why I push so hard (sometimes offensively so) for the human behind the PR/work to be revealed. Part of it is standing up and owning the work produced, even if it was produced wholly or in part by AI, and part of it is ensuring that that peer that I want to talk to is actually capable of understanding the problem and solution.
Most fixes, every feature, and every PR adds maintenance burden to a project maintainer. If someone sends me a drive-by PR authored by AI, I have no idea whether the submitter intends to stick around.
-
@aimee@mastodon.nz great suggestions, thanks! Science magazines would be great reading material :)
-
@julian Aeon? New Scientist? As for books - SO MANY (mostly sci-fi) :P Read Transmetropolitan? Or Afrian Tchaikovsky's work? Also, the Discworld novels :)
-
Jonathan Haidt's been doing a media tour to promote his and Catherine Price's new book, The Amazing Generation.
After watching the duo's segment on The Daily Show, it's inspired my wife and I to try a digital sabbath on Saturdays again.
Part of why it failed in the past (multiple times, I'm sad to say) was that we didn't have anything physical to read. We'd start making small concessions ("I'm reading a Kindle, it's ok"), leading to more concessions ("I'm only using my phone to look something up"), and pretty soon we'd be back on our phones again.
So, fedi, any suggestions for book series' and (print) magazines to subscribe to?
We're probably going to subscribe to Macleans, but it's monthly now, so we need more suggestions!
Bonus if it's Canadian content, but not a hard requirement.
We'll probably do Chirp for the kids, too.
-
So NodeBB tests have been failing for the past few days because coveralls.io is down.
Coveralls is a code coverage bot that is free for open source projects. We integrated it into our workflow years ago and it's been trucking along fine all these years.
While coveralls being down technically prevents us from running our tool to launch a new version, we could always just do it manually.
Their outage page is here: https://status.coveralls.io/
They are on day 3 of the outage and have absolutely no idea when things will come back up.
This paragraph is worded curiously:
> We want to be transparent with you: after two full days of working directly with our hosting provider’s account team, we still do not have an ETA for service restoration. Despite having internal sponsorship within our provider’s organization, we have been unable to get the traction needed to resolve what appears to have been an automated action, one that no one on their side has taken ownership of causing or fixing.
(Emphasis mine.)
Perhaps I have been reading too many AI-doomer articles. This sounds like an AI agent went in and started deleting shit.
The post mortem is going to be very very very interesting.
cc @mariusor@metalhead.club, because he started an HN thread about it
-
@gabboman sorry for the delay, it has been approved now.
-
this is just a test post because i need to test stuff on this software with wafrn
-
@reiver@mastodon.social I would've! Unfortunately we booked a family vacation for this week, before FOSDEM dates had been announced 😅
Send save the dates for FediCon! 😝
