I did not write a single line of code but carefully shepherded AI over the course of several days … my work was just directing, shaping, cajoling and reviewing.
Beats me. AI decided to do so and I didn’t question it.
So, which one is it? Did you carefully shepherd and review the code, or did you just trust the AI without questioning it?
Here’s hoping, probably in vain, that this dude learns a lesson about what’s appropriate in the open source world.
You should have included the bit before he said, beats me. It’s comedy gold.
A curious aspect to the submission was that some of the source code was credited to Mark Shinwell at Jane Street Europe, a financial trading company whose research includes an open source project called OxCaml, described as a safer and more performant version of OCaml, and which includes DWARF debugging support.
“This seems to be largely a copy of the work done in OxCaml” remarked OCaml contributor Tim McGilchrist, who is also working on the project. Asked why some of the files credited Shinwell as the author, Reymont said, “Beats me. AI decided to do so and I didn’t question it.”
With all his “directing, shaping, cajoling and reviewing” he never noticed that his AI code credited someone else, who was working on a similar project with similar goals, as the author?
So, which one is it? Did you carefully shepherd and review the code, or did you just trust the AI without questioning it?
Here’s hoping, probably in vain, that this dude learns a lesson about what’s appropriate in the open source world.
You should have included the bit before he said, beats me. It’s comedy gold.
With all his “directing, shaping, cajoling and reviewing” he never noticed that his AI code credited someone else, who was working on a similar project with similar goals, as the author?