When confronted about LLM writing completely broken tests the guy said the funniest thing: "It knows what it’s doing but tends to be… lazy."

I'm a big fan of LLMs but this guy is just a joke. He understand nothing of the code the LLM generates. He says things like "The LLM knows".

He is not going to convince anybody to merge is PRs, since he is not even checking that the tests the LLM generates are correct. It's a joke.

In a submission to OCaml, when asked why the files he submitted list someone else as an author he says,

    > Beats me. AI decided to do so and I didn't question it.°

I find that sort of attitude terrifying.

° https://github.com/ocaml/ocaml/pull/14369#issuecomment-35573...

I cannot believe it's not trolling

Yeah, either this guy's totally insane or it could even be somebody who's an AI skeptic who's just flooding projects with really dumb PRs just to show the risks and get people skeptical about the use of AI in open source (Takes on my folie hat)

That is a curious take. Open source projects were flooded by dumb PRs before AI too, so what would it prove?

Intentional or not its an interesting social experiment.

that's a grifter doing grifting. there was a thread on /g/ about this guy the other day, anons digged out much of its past as a failure / grifter in many areas, running away with the money at the first problem

I'd be willing to put money that before LLMs they were all in ok crypto

When looking at this history here on HN, he started out in the poker world. I'm not sure if he played, but he wrote a poker engine or something. In my experience, the venn diagram for professional poker players, crypto enthusiasts and grifters have a lot of overlap.

But for this guy specifically there's practically complete radio silence during the crypto era. It's only recently with all the AI noise that he's become active here on HN again.

  function estimate_method_targets(func_name::Symbol, types::Tuple)
      # Conservative estimate
      # In a real implementation, we'd query the method table
      return 2  # Assume multiple possibilities
  end

Hilarious. Was this model trained on XKCD [0] by any chance?

[0]: https://xkcd.com/221/

Among all the other problems with this... They describe [1] their contributions as "steering the AI" and "keeping it honest", which evidently they did not.

[1] https://discourse.julialang.org/t/ai-generated-enhancements-...

As an aside, he originally titled the thread "A complete guide to building static binaries with Julia (updated for 1.12)", with no mention of AI. That got me excited every time I opened the Discourse, until I remembered it was this slop. :/

Similar things on the OCaml forums. He has a post titled “Dune: concurrent builds are here!” but really it’s a +967 -100 slop PR that had to be closed