this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2026
230 points (97.5% liked)
Open Source
47413 readers
156 users here now
All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!
Useful Links
- Open Source Initiative
- Free Software Foundation
- Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Software Freedom Conservancy
- It's FOSS
- Android FOSS Apps Megathread
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to the open source ideology
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
- !libre_culture@lemmy.ml
- !libre_software@lemmy.ml
- !libre_hardware@lemmy.ml
- !linux@lemmy.ml
- !technology@lemmy.ml
Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I suspect it would work. But the false positive rate would be really high.
In other words, they could probably detect sloppy junk reasonably well, but I suspect it would flag too many human PRs to make the automation particularly useful.
That, and the good seeming vibe coded PRs are the ones the worry about. Those are the ones that seem to slot in, but might have an error or general misunderstanding somewhere in them that’s just really hard to detect, as it would be common sense to a human working on the project, but not to an LLM agent.
As a random specific example, I had a local LLM + Gemini 3.1 fix this issue with a Rimworld mod for me. It was really simple; just changing one line in an XML file.
But neither of them realized the change was, ultimately, bad practice. They re-defined something inherited from a parent class, which would prevent other mods’ changes in that parent class chain from percolating down to this. Any basic Rimworld modder would know this is a recipe for trouble, but an LLM isn’t cognizant like that and has no clue.
Now: imagine that, but in a huge PR for a complex codebase.
It’s just too much to look for. The LLM could make a non-obvious, “inhuman” mistake at any point.