this post was submitted on 17 Dec 2024
181 points (100.0% liked)

Programming

17666 readers
346 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities [email protected]

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
snowe
Ategon
[email protected]
181
WSL documentation fix initially rejected because AI has difficulty understanding markdown tables (github.com)
submitted 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) by [email protected] to c/programming
16 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

It was merged after they where rightfully ridiculed by the community.

The awful response to the backlash by matwojo really takes the cake:

I've learned today that you are sensitive to ensuring human readability over any concerns in regard to AI consumption

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 38 points 4 days ago (2 children)

They excused it as "I'm overworked" which... fair enough, but that doesn't excuse this. I blame Microsoft, not this fella.

[–] Kissaki 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Later, they comment:

I've learned today that you are sensitive to ensuring human readability over any concerns in regard to AI consumption

Their takeaway from

  1. They reject with one of the reasons, and the only disclosed reason, being AI is worse at reading the form
  2. Community says AI readability should not be a priority over human readability
  3. That it may not even be a problem for AI to read
  4. Suggest at least considering an improvement in a form that both can read well

is that the community wants to "ensure human readability over any concerns in regard to AI".

I don't think this is only about MS or being overworked. Yes, it was a harsh push-back. But they're responding passive aggressively, claiming the community pushes the other/an extreme when, to me very clearly, it does not.

Maybe you can say that conclusion is also due do being overworked and not investing the time to read through the comments. But I dunno. There's no need to reply in that passive aggressive tone and claiming unreasonable things.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago

AI is good for the messy inbox problem, but it ain't perfect.