Related:
This is in a PR where Shougo, another long-time contributor, communicates entirely in walls of unparseable AI slop text: https://github.com/vim/vim/pull/19413
Thank you for the detailed feedback! I’ve addressed all the issues:
Thank you for the feedback! I agree that following the Vim 8+ naming convention makes sense.
Thank you for the feedback on naming!
Thanks for the suggestion! After thinking about this more, I believe repeat_set() / repeat_get() is the right choice:
Thank you for the feedback. A brief clarification.
AI psychosis
Shougo is Japanese. I’m guessing he communicates like that because he uses translation rather than trying to communicate in broken English.
TBF if the reviewer just quoted Claude at me, I would reply with Claude or ChatGPT.
I would like to mirror another commentor and mention that Shougo is Japanese and probably issuing Claude to communicate.
I spent literally all day yesterday working on this:
https://sciactive.com/human-contribution-policy/
I’ve started to add it to my projects. Eventually, it will be on all of my projects. I made it so that any project could adopt it, or modify it to their needs. It’s got a thorough and clear definition of what is banned, too, so it should help any argument over pull requests.
Hopefully more projects will outright ban AI generated code (and other AI generated material).
I like this approach, but how can it be enforced? Would you have to read every line and listen to a gut feeling?
Same mindset as “You don’t need a perfect lock to protect your house from thieves, you just need one better than what your neighbors have.”
If a vibecoder sees this they will not bother with obfuscation and simply move onto the next project.
Basically the best you can do is continue as normal, and if someone submits something that says it is or obviously is AI, point to this policy and reject it. Just having the policy should be a decent deterrent.
No, it’s a prejudiced hot take that’s completely and utterly unenforceable which will be seen as some Luddite behavior in 10 years when everyone is using the tooling.
That kind of troll language doesn’t work in this forum. Cya 👋
Tell us how you really feel.
I did. And you’re worried about clankers being able to comprehend as well as a human 🤣, good Lord the bar is low.
Couldn’t help but notice the casual gendering of Claude to “he” as well.
Someone somewhere made the important observation not long ago that computer assistants tended to be gendered female when more like a secretary (Siri and Alexa) but now that AIs are “intelligent” and powerful … Claude now has to be a male.
Especially weird (and telling?) when it is objectively gender neutral as it’s not human.
Let’s not lose focus more on the more immediate concern here, that this person is using a human pronoun to describe a computer.
Couldn’t help but notice the casual gendering of Claude to “he” as well.
“Claude” is a male given name. If you think it’s actually a problem, blame Anthropic for giving their LLM a gendered name. I’ve never gendered AI assistants, but I’m not going to begrudge people who do when it’s in the name (or in the case of old Siri, the voice, which would later be the default rather than only option).
Women named “Claude” exist, but they’re staggeringly outnumbered by men to a point where most people don’t even know of women named “Claude” – let alone would immediately associate it as masculine.
Not blaming anyone, this is social commentary.
But like the neutral “it” is right there.
In a world that’s both charged around gender and pronoun usage, and focused on the nature and value of LLMs … I think it’s weird that there isn’t more commonly pushback enforcing the non-human neutral for the simple reason that it’s an objective fact amidst a swampy pool of (mis-)information synthesis.
A little like the bechdel test, I feel like it’s the casualness and indifference around this gender bias (at least at the moment) that’s interesting and telling.
it’s extremely telling however the shift in marketing. i don’t believe giving the coding plagiarism bot a male name is coincidental. most feminists would probably agree. we’ve known for decades that chatbots were given female names because they’re trying to reenact some tradwife fetish and attract a male audience
it’s extremely telling however the shift in marketing
And your hypothesis doesn’t fall apart now why, exactly? AI assistants are more secretary-like than they’ve ever been. “Write me an email.” “Proofread my work.” Beyond that, people are using LLMs as substitutes for significant others.
And yet now, Microsoft migrated “Cortana” to “Copilot”, Siri is more gender-neutral than ever, Alexa still exists off massive brand recognition, and other major AI services are called e.g. “ChatGPT”, “Claude”, “DeepSeek”, and “Grok”. Collectively, that’s gender-neutral.
At most, the hypothesis used to be true but isn’t anymore, because you can literally make an LLM act like a tradwife now if you’re so
debasedinclined, yet the names are broadly neutral. The MIT Press has a good, lengthy article about the history of gender in speech synthesis, as an aside.
Yes… they chose to give the tool a male name. Did this need to be said ?
Yes, because the person I was replying to said:
Couldn’t help but notice the casual gendering of Claude to “he” as well.
“Casual gendering” is implying the Vim author calling Claude “he” was totally out of the blue. It’s not “casual”; it’s something Anthropic baked in by giving it a male name.
Casual doesnt mean “out of the blue”, it means reflexive or without effort.
Sure, I know what “casual” means and that out of the meanings, a more apt one I should’ve chosen would’ve been “incidental”. That doesn’t change my overall point that they’re putting the entire onus of the gendering on the author as though it isn’t the same as someone calling Alexa “she”.
Replace this entire scenario with someone calling Alexa “she”: the accusation of “casual gendering” would obviously be ridiculous, because Alexa has a popular female given name.
Or maybe, just maybe, it has a guys name.
Good Lord y’all made up since crazy shit to whine about.
Let’s not over interpret things here. Siri and Alexa are both mainly voice assistants, or at least started out as such. Studies have been conducted that show people trust female voices more than male voices. So the choice of female voices was obvious, and having female names is nothing surprising.
Also, Siri, Alexa and Cortana were seen as “intelligent” at the time, as well (or were supposed to be seen, depending on who you ask).
Also, Siri, Alexa and Cortana were seen as “intelligent” at the time, as well (or were supposed to be seen, depending on who you ask).
Intelligent for the time, sure, but ever pitched as doing more than a Secretary that never encroaches on or gets involved with your actual job and cognitive skills? Because that’s the divide that’s being enforced: women for the menial dumb tasks and men for the serious, difficult and actually valuable and important stuff.
Of all the problems with these things we’re taking issue with the naming?
Oh no! Another issue! I’m a jellyfish and can only respond to a limited number of stimuli at a time because I have not centralised nervous system capable of organising my critiques into diverse and disparate arguments! I can only talk about vanishingly simple problems that are one-dimensional enough for me to tunnel vision on repeating the same talking points, preferably no longer than a dozen syllables total to accomodate not having a long-term memory centre due to my aforementioned lack of a brain 🪼🥺
I am very tired and have gone absolutely overboard on this comment, to the person I’m responding to pls don’t take this personally, more rational, less sleepy me doesn’t want to be a troll. But SERIOUSLY? You’re argument isn’t even “this isn’t a problem”, it’s “I can’t see the value in doing a full deconstruction of this novel ethical scenario and just want to be a sheep saying it’s bad for the reason my favourite shepherd says so, not because of healthy discussion of ALL the pros and cons.” Reminds me of those cringe posts from a couple months ago where people were saying “the epstein files are a distraction! don’t forget about my favourite political issue {insert valid issue}”. I’m going to be a hypocrite for a second bc this long arse comment is 1,000,000x worse than yours, but consider why you’re commenting before you hit post next time.
That’s a lot of words you’re putting my mouth, and a lot of names you’re calling a stranger on the internet. But you seem like an alright person, so I hope your day gets better.
wtf. i really like vim. is everyone really using neovim instead and there’s no good dev maintaining vim now?
Just use VScode, definitely no slop in there. Microslop would never
I switched to helix editor since last I saw, it appears to lack AI use. That said, Neovim isn’t awful and is less enthusiastically pro-ai. Helix also still does not have a plugin system so for the time being you’re kind of constrained to its built-in features and customization options
looks sane
i ❤️vim. used it for some 15 years.
switched to neovim cause of firenvim which allowed me to use neovim in text areas in firefox
It’s such a monumental waste of LLMs to include these slop phrases.
Employee 1 enters a prompt to send a slop mail that is so garbage it is unbearable to read using a brain.
So employee 2 either summarizes the slop mail using an LLM too or skips obtaining the information entirely and just goes straight to answering by prompting the next slop mail.
I wonder if that’s by design - to make interacting with slop so painful that human-to-human communication will not happen without a LLM in between anymore.
Reverse compression: making transmission larger (while still being lossy).
I originally meant to leave a much shorter comment; apologies.
I can’t code to save my life. However I find your observation interesting. The way I see it, AI, no matter where, is eroding human to human interactions. It becomes the middleman for everything.
It’s really obvious with personal research. A couple years ago if you wanted to start say, growing tomatoes in your backyard, you would have searched people’s comments on a variety of media platforms, would have read a few books or blogs. You would have asked questions to a bunch of people with some experience, left a like or upvote on people posting photos of their tomatoes, you would have used your own judgement to discern what consisted good quality advice and what not.
It would have taken you days. But all that interaction is very rewarding especially for those authoring comments, blogs, books, and photos of their experiences. Because nobody makes something just to be ignored.
Now LLM does all that process for you. In a matter of seconds. And giving no feedback or interaction to anyone whose information was used. It’s depressing, but I’m intrigued to see how it plays out.
I had this reflection 3 years ago, and I think that’s where we’re headed.
The internet is already un-useable for search without prompting an LLM to gather the info you need for you, and it’s getting worse every month.
I agree. Specifically for your example I think the transformation has been going on for a while with the aggressive monitization of internet content / the ad industry and the general downfall of google search. LLMs could to be the final nail in the coffin for nieche expertise on the broader internet.
I too am curious to see how AI companies will try to overcome the lack of human generated content to train their models on.
Having an AI understand your codebase, and potentially answering an issue, which might not be an issue is great I think.
The problem I see here is that you have no idea that a bot is answering. Why isnt there a ‘shougo-bot’ / ‘vim-helper-bot’ / whatever named bot user for it?
“Talking” to an AI should always be disclosed, everyone feels betrayed whenever they find out that a clanker is on the other side of the channel.
I don’t think those comments are generated and posted automatically by a bot plugged to their github repo. I think they are generated by the author using an LLM and copy-pasted there - or if the account is plugged to some LLM, they are at least manually reviewed. The answer to the replied-to comment are posted from 10 minutes to some hours later. I don’t think they lost their mind to the point of giving unvetted access to their reputable account to an AI that simply posts for them. That said, they could al least strip the obvious/uneasy parts that give very LLM vibes, specifically those quoted in the op
I wonder what Bram’s stance would have been on AI.
Anyway, looks like it’s time to learn emacs.
The learning curve is a bit steep, but if you already figured out – and felt comfortable in – Vim, it shouldn’t be that hard.
Some people suggest Doom Emacs or evil, but I enjoy learning ‘vanilla’ first, then going for some framework or customization layer afterwards, if I do it at all.
Use Doom Emacs, then it’s usual Vim bindings + the space bar for fancy commands. The difficult part would be Emacs Lisp for customization, but then again it’s way better than Vimscript.
I’m probably more surprised than I should be that so many programmers are so pathetically lonely and delusional.
Well that’s a first. First time I’ve ever recognized a github name I’ve pulled from before in a drama article. Used Dein in my vim config a while back. RIP
Edit: rearranged added rip
Amazing watching you all screech at every maintainer that makes your software for free.
I’m sure all of you are busy making forks which you’ll surely dedicate your own time to keeping AI out and keeping up.
I see less random screeching here and more shock. Vim is a long lived, well trusted piece of software, and there’s the shock of “they’re using AI assistance” but more so “What the fuck is that incomprehensible mess and why was it not proofread.”
That’s the most damning part for me. I’d prefer zero AI usage, but I can tolerate clearly labeled usage reviewed by people who know what the fuck they’re doing.
That wack ass “thank you” block in the OP demonstrates that nobody is proofreading, and that’s absolutely braindead. AI isn’t a solution for lack of care.
More directly, if you’re so convinced that we’re all in the wrong, why are you participating here? Just block the comm.
There’s already one, don’t worry: https://codeberg.org/NerdNextDoor/evi
And I’m sure y’all will be on it keeping it up to date ensuring it’s long term success.
Stupid is as stupid…
I’m working half the amount of time I did before. I’m A OK getting trashed on by some Luddite working twice as hard for half as much money. They’re going to give me more money for it too.
🤷♂️
The devs do have my sympathy, they dedicate their time and energy for these projects and start burning out.
The solution obviously shouldn’t be drowning it on slop. They should be just slowing down. Vim has been an excellent and functional tool for many years now, it doesn’t need more speed.
There are better ways to use LLMs as a productivity tool.What I’m wondering is, why does Vim need new features in the core repo at all?
It’s finished software at this point.
The dev should just do security upgrades and let extensions developed by other people handle additional functionality.There aren’t better ways, not in their current forms.
I see this excuse of burn out every time it comes to LLM use, but i honestly do not buy it. You cant tell me every other dev out there just burnt out at the same time in sync with the release of LLM coding assistants. If you use LLMs like this you simply dont care about the project anymore and should move on with your life. Its better for everyone if it gets abandoned by the original dev and forked by ones that care. Sometimes you just gotta let go.
Agreed. They need to take a break at least.
Emacs. C?min ;)
Doom with evil.
