Here and there are posts about tailwind losing its revenue stream. And then people / post authors conclude open source is lost and spread FUD.
Do you think your projects die because of LLMs?
I only have public hobby projects, I am not afraid. I also try to donate to a lot of free software that I use or like.
E.g. this https://programming.dev/post/43810907 or https://programming.dev/post/45292081
No genuine good open source project is dying because it is getting replaced by LLM slop code. People that need stable and secure software and know what they are doing would never use LLM made software.
What LLMs do destroy is peoples patience in dealing with bug reports and forum communication. Those are getting overrun with LLM generated garbage replies.
Who said anything about replacement?
The post mentions revenue stream, so its about people going with slop software instead of normal one. In other words replacement.
It burns you out pretty quick. I have a popular library and had to turn off gh issues. So many llm/fake bug reports. Huge waste of time and effort. Github has gone downhill.
CodeBerg is really nice, has a free tier, and has guided tutorials for migration.
I moved my work out of spite for GitHub’s warmongering parent company.
And then I was pleasantly surprised by how nice CodeBerg is.
CodeBerg sounds great but this doesn’t seem like a longterm solution. If CodeBerg ends up getting really big then it will get overrun with slop as well. We need to find a way to cut the slop problem off at its source, but I have no idea how that could actually work.
Agreed. Stopping giving money to Microsoft seems like a place to start.
Plus, probably filters out low value contributions. People on Codeberg are generally genuinely interested in a project and not chasing activity graphs/clout/CV padding.