5 ms·
I have personally seen this happen: Someone tried to contribute “vibe-coded” device support to a project I’m involved with, they said they did it all based on
by eschaton 2mo ago
I have personally seen this happen:
Someone tried to contribute “vibe-coded” device support to a project I’m involved with, they said they did it all based on the device documentation, the code their agents spit out was copied verbatim out of a (GPL’d) project with which I’m familiar which supports that device.
LLMs are not learning things and then using that learning to construct new things. They are essentially a form of lossy compression of their training set. And you don’t need to be explicit about trying to reproduce a portion of that training set for an LLM to output one.
- user43928 2mo agoAs it happens, all evaluations I have seen in the news were in fact explicit about trying to reproduce a portion of the training set. I am not aware of any study attempting to measure unintentional reproduction. With your example, I question whether you have seen this happen first hand. For all I know, the contributor could have explicitly prompted the model to reference the GPL project and had the agent clone the code from the web.
- eschaton 2mo agoAt a certain point you have to take people at their word; I’m reporting what the contributor said they did (used the documentation to generate the code).