This is a scary trend. I have seen quite a few repos with fully autogenerated code. Some sort of reporting would be required. On GitHub side one check that could expose such bad actors would be to monitor how much code is committed per time period (this particular guy did most of the code 2-3 months ago).
If the project were hand-written rather than AI-generated yet still labeled “production-ready,” what would meaningfully change? I think most AI criticism is sloppy. Look at your post here: you spend most of your effort trying to call out his use of AI, but your ultimate issue, the one that caused you to post on HN, comes down only to the fact that the package says “production-ready.” Do you really hate AI so much that you will blame it for issues completely unrelated to AI?
This is a scary trend. I have seen quite a few repos with fully autogenerated code. Some sort of reporting would be required. On GitHub side one check that could expose such bad actors would be to monitor how much code is committed per time period (this particular guy did most of the code 2-3 months ago).
You do realize that your idea of a "code committed per time period" check is not how Git works, right?
If the project were hand-written rather than AI-generated yet still labeled “production-ready,” what would meaningfully change? I think most AI criticism is sloppy. Look at your post here: you spend most of your effort trying to call out his use of AI, but your ultimate issue, the one that caused you to post on HN, comes down only to the fact that the package says “production-ready.” Do you really hate AI so much that you will blame it for issues completely unrelated to AI?