I'm more upset about it being factually wrong, e.g. both mentions of "git-ignored" are absurd (why would you mention it if it's not in the repo?) and wrong (they are in the repo).

If you think about it, actually the author did write what they did (nothing), and also how it’s used (it isn’t).

Exactly. The code, whatever, it's for machines so I don't really care if it's by machines as long as it works. But if you can't even be bothered to think about the human-facing parts of your thing like docs and UX, I'm not really interested. It just feels cheap (in the bad sense) and offputting.

Agree.

I do feel like there's merit to having an open source implementation of anything, no matter who/what wrote it. I'm just hoping the results are validated well.

> what they did

bold of you to assume the code wasn't llm generated as well.

you think a human wrote the code? in a month? Do you think that's air you're breathing? might be time to challenge preconceptions

I'm fine with it

If the README is >90% AI generated and it is as long as a novel, I am not going to read it and will assume that the author did not read or write it either.

Unfortunately it is slop, beyond the comprehension of the author unless they are experienced with DLSS internals to explain it in depth.

"Am I the only one who feels a sense of disinterest in a project where the code is LLM-generated? Does the author not have time to code the project?"

This is how I feel about every single project announcement on HN recently, they are already bragging about models all over the place, why shouldn't they go full way down being replaced by the Borg?

Slop is a new language and you will learn it read it