This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
I already got out in March when github decided to close my account because I didn't want to involve my phone with my github account.
Codeberg has been a much more pleasant experience.
I've always hated GitHub glad to see it finally is going to crumble
Threatening remarks like that are why I learned PHPUnit and XDebug, and yeah it made me become a better developer, but often times these are just empty statements.
AI is just another tool in my toolbox, but it's not everything.
The git site has instructions on how to create your own git server in 30 mins.
It's very easy once you know it's literally just an SSH account.For personal projects or small teams is absolutely fine.
For open source there are lots of GitHub alternatives
Damn, Microsoft rolling out the "Fuck You" hits lately. Allowing hate speech against Transgender people on LinkedIn, and now this shit on Github, not even mentioning the absolute bullshit their Desktop is these days.
Never been a better time to be eying alternatives. Fuck you Github CEO, fuck you LinkedIn, fuck you Microsoft, and fuck you Satya Nadella! 🖕🖕🖕🖕
Git out.
welp I guess time to open a codeberg account
Looks like I’ll get out then.
My for-hire work has been off GitHub for awhile now. My patience for VS Code is razor thin with the stupid features creeping in.
20 years ago I decided to make websites as a career and I’ve been loving it—up until the people who want to sell me tools I don’t want start convincing my bosses that I’m somehow less if I don’t get on board with the always-guessing error machine.
I am embracing AI. For better or worse, it's here to stay. The issue with the current AI models is that they are over-hyped. It would just lead to a bubble burst like had happened with dotcom. The full capability of AI will probably improve in ten or fifteen years.
Is it, though? AI has been around to stay for 20 years. The difference really is that a bunch of tech bros are worshiping it while trade rags talk it up.
I'll agree that it's here to stay, but not so sure it's going to obviously improve. I have had access to various LLMs and while they are useful, they are very obviously limited and have kind of been at that level for a while now. Feel like they've largely gotten as "capable" as the strategy is going to get, and now the game is on to make some things friendlier for LLM consumption to get that capability more usefully available.
At least in the context of coding.
Thanks for showing your true colors, asshole. I guess the git repositories I have to send potential employers to show the projects that I've done in my spare time might have to go self-hosted.
Call it the network effect, or the momentum of becoming a staple in the tech community, or whatever; GitHub is here to stay for a while, and the leaders in charge of it are well aware of this.
GitHub has gained enough attention that it is almost impossible to ignore. Projects on GitHub tend to attract a level of engagement (code contributions, issue reports, and feedback) that other code forges do not enjoy.
One unfortunate consequence of this, which I have experienced recently, is when recruiters ask for links to my past work or open-source contributions but refuse to accept links to relevant repositories on GitLab. The number of companies where this occurred was significant enough for me to set up mirror repositories on GitHub.
Another frustrating but silly consequence was when I was questioned during one of the interviews why my activity graph on GitHub was empty: I had simply not enabled it.
Replace the CEOs with AI. Hell, replace all executive positions with AI. Think of the savings!
just saying codeberg and forgejo is right there and doesn't have ai rubbish.
I'm a professional developer and have tested AI tools extensively over the last few years as they develop. The economic implications of the advancements made over the last few months are simply impossible to ignore. The tools aren't perfect, and you certainly need to structure their use around their strengths and weaknesses, but assigned to the right tasks they can be 10% or less of the cost with better results. I've yet to have a project where I've used them and they didn't need an experienced engineer to jump in and research an obscure or complex bug, have a dumb architectural choice rejected, or verify if stuff actually works (they like reporting success when they shouldn't), but again the economics; the dev can be doing other stuff 90% of the time.
Don't get me wrong, on the current trajectory this tech would probably lead to deeply terrible socioeconomic outcomes, probably techno neofeudalism, but for an individual developer putting food on the table I don't see it as much of a choice. It's like the industrial revolution again, but for cognitive work.
I keep hearing stuff like this, but I haven't found a good use or workflow for AI (other than occasional chatbot sessions). Regular autocomplete is more accurate (no hallucinations) and faster than AI suggestions (especially accounting for needing to constantly review the suggestions for correctness). I guess stuff like Cursor is OK at making one-off tools on very small code-bases, but hits a brick-wall when the code base gets too big. Then you're left with a bunch of unmaintainable code you're not very familiar with and you would to spend a lot of time trying to fix yourself. Dunno if I'm doing something wrong or what.
I guess what I'm saying is that using AI can speed you up to a point while the project accumulates massive amounts of technical debt, and when you take into account all the refactoring and debugging time, it results in taking longer to produce a buggier project. At least, in my experience.
I'm finding AI effectively automates entry level jobs and interns. The long term implications is very few will be able to enter the field. What do we do when all the experienced engineers retire? How will we shift our economy to work for everyone under this model?
