Ask HN: We need a standard way to declare how much AI was used in a PR

2 points by heeton 41 days ago | 4 comments

There's a big difference between these situations:

- a PR that is quickly drafted by LLM based on a prompt

- a careful spec designed by humans, worked on by AI

- a feature built with a dev and LLM closely working together, with code reviews

- a feature with parts fixed up by AI, but 90% human written

- human written, checked with AI

etc

Is anyone moving towards a standard way of describing this? I'd love something that can go at the bottom of an communication / PR / proposal.

genrus00 41 days ago |

I believe that it isn't that important to quantify how much AI is involved in a PR. It's not possible to measure it other than asking and right now it isn't even a good metric. LLMs could be producing good code and a human could be producing really bad code. As somebody said, just ask if AI was in any way involved in the coding process and treat the code as such.

jjgreen 41 days ago |

   [ ] Was AI used in this PR in any way at all?

gus_massa 41 days ago | |

Does using he free version of Gemini in http://www.google.com to find the correct page of the documentation count as using AI?

heeton 41 days ago | |

Sardonic but not useful.