New ask Hacker News story: Ask HN: How are you attributing your AI usage when developing software?
Ask HN: How are you attributing your AI usage when developing software?
4 by hartleybrody | 2 comments on Hacker News.
I have started a convention of prefixing a commit message with "prompt:" for commits that are entirely AI generated (which I have read through and approved) and then I make my own manual changes and iterations in subsequent commits. I feel like this is a reasonable attempt at disclosure, but it also seems like it's lacking. I usually include a summary, not the entire prompt (how would I included tool use?) I don't say which models or "agent" was used (cursor sidebar chat vs calude code, etc). Not sure if this matters though? How have you been managing this in your own workflows?
4 by hartleybrody | 2 comments on Hacker News.
I have started a convention of prefixing a commit message with "prompt:" for commits that are entirely AI generated (which I have read through and approved) and then I make my own manual changes and iterations in subsequent commits. I feel like this is a reasonable attempt at disclosure, but it also seems like it's lacking. I usually include a summary, not the entire prompt (how would I included tool use?) I don't say which models or "agent" was used (cursor sidebar chat vs calude code, etc). Not sure if this matters though? How have you been managing this in your own workflows?
Comments
Post a Comment