Uh. I'd really prefer if people experimented with new technology a bit more cautiously and not directly jump to "the biggest release [...] ever done".

It looks like that tool is more or less built by a single developer (you already trust their judgment anyways!), and even though the code came through in a single PR it was a merge from a branch that had 79 separate commits: https://github.com/binwiederhier/ntfy/pull/1619

Also glancing through it a bit, huge portions of that are straightforward refactors or even just formatting changes caused by adding a new backend option.

I'm not going to say it's fine, but they didn't just throw Claude at a problem and let it rewrite 25k lines of code unnecessarily.

@ueiqkkwhuwjw just this quote at the start of the release notes> 14,997 added lines of code, and 10,202 lines removed, all from one pull requestThis is already a major red flag even without the ai stuff right? Can't believe anyone would flaunt that like this.

If you use ntfy mainly as a Unified Push distributor on Android, then I highly recommend switching to a XMPP client that can do the same.

Fuck, I love ntfy, it's one of the best self hosted push notification systems I've used. It has been flawless so far.

Don't like this.

ts getting you pinned to 2.17 in the compose file 🥹🤞🥀

That's concerning. If it was "I generated a function with an LLM and reviewed it myself" I'd be much less concerned, but 14k added lines and 10k removed lines is crazy. We already know that LLMs don't generate up to scratch code quality...

I won't use PostgreSQL with ntfy, and keep an eye on it to see if they continue down this path for other parts of ntfy. If so I'll have to switch to another UP provider.

Yeah, this is now inherently untrustworthy. Better to switch to an alternative.

Definitely time to find an alternative. What the actual fuck is this

Oh goddamn it, I'm using this and don't have an alternative lined up

Look, if he wanted to introduce AI code, whatever, but doing it all at once in a 14k line change is crazy.

Surely it would be better to introduce AI by letting it handle misc changes here and there instead of starting with the "biggest release ever done" (his words), no?

Definitely share your initial concern. Without strong review processes to ensure that every line of code follows the intent of the human developer, there’s no way of knowing what exactly is in there and the implications for the human users. And I’m not just talking about bugs.

They say it’s reviewed, but the temptation to blindly trust is there. In this case, developer appears to have taken some care.

The code was written by Cursor and Claude, but reviewed and heavily tested over 2-3 weeks by me. I created comparison documents, went through all queries multiple times and reviewed the logic over and over again. I also did load tests and manual regression tests, which took lots of evenings.

Let us hope so. Handle with care to ensure responsibility is not offloaded to a machine instead of a person.

I just set up a ntfy server for Unified Push earlier this week to use with Matrix. Now I have to turn around and immediately replace it...

Oh ffs..

Thanks for the heads-up

Time for a fork?

I switched to Gotify when I ran into an issue where ntfy would delete old api tokens when creating more than 20. Only thing missing in Gotify is UniversalPush, other than that it feels actually more solid than ntfy to me.

I've been meaning to put something like this in my setup for a while, but definitely not this now! List of alternatives in the Custom Communication section at awesome selfhosted

I'll embrace the inevitable fork.

I'm assuming this is some sort of canary message to indicate that the code base has been compromised, the author can't talk about it, and everyone should immediately stop using the service. Surely no-one would be unwise enough to commit this otherwise?

Even ignoring the huge red LLM flag, a 25kLOC delta in a single PR should be cause for instant rejection as there's no way to fully understand or test it, let alone in 2-3 weeks.

I'm a developer

I sometimes sometimes use AI for an answer to a complicated problem because normally I'd open up 20 pages , have to go through them all to find the right answer

AI gets me the answer right away, though it likely is completely wrong or at least partially wrong. Either way, it gives me a general direction and with that I only have to search through one or two pages to confirm, so the same process is just a little faster.

I laso have used AI on a couple of occasions to ask it to write code for a complicated problem. Again, you don't copy the code, god no, it's always the worst, and it is in 80% of the cases still at least riddled with bugs, or just complete bullshit. However, it might give me an alternative idea or a direction to take to implement or fix this complicated feature problem.

That's the extent to which I've used AI and for the foreseeable future that won't change because AI still can't code. It's still wildly flailing around and it might produce something that implements a certain functionality, but it's a guarantee that that functionality will have more bugs and security holes than features

I can see the pragmatic appeal. Maintaining a lot of code for an open source project is thankless. Go is designed for idiots like me so it makes sense that an llm should be able to emit code that mostly works. There are classes of errors that are less likely in Go and the compiler and linting will prevent some foot guns and then it would have been tested.

Ethically I hate anything to do with the llm industry and all it represents. I hate the environmental impacts. The social impacts. The disregard for intellectual property. The devaluing of human effort. The scam economics. I won't use anything touched by it on principle and if that means walking away from a dead Internet so be it. There is enough pre-2020s books, audiobooks, movies, music and code to keep me interested for the rest of my life.

I'm so tired of that.

I'm using it for scripts notifications + unifiedpush. I don't know where to start to find the fitting alternative.