Human vs. AI – Diff-based line-level provenance for text under agentic editing

(github.com)

36 points by eighttrigrams5 hours ago

5 comments

spuz1 hour ago
> A git repository is already a history of versions each carrying a provenance marker — every revision of the file, in order, with the author of the change that made it.<p>Maybe I'm missing how people use AI these days but when I have an agent working locally, all git commits have my authorship attached.
- drusepth9 minutes ago
  A /precommit tool can be very powerful -- not only can it run the tests, do light code review on its own, spin up sub-agents to review performance/architecture/etc impacts, but it can also write hilariously-verbose commit messages once everything passes, detailing not only what changed but why it changed.. tagged with Claude as a co-author.
- eighttrigrams42 minutes ago
  I take care of that in two ways, 1) is via claude hooks, I make sure these are tagged as claude, 2) my sandboxed agents have git env vars set, with the same effect.
  - spuz27 minutes ago
    Does Claude run git commit on every change it makes? Doesn't that pollute your git history?
    - eighttrigrams22 minutes ago
      Although that would be an option (I've considered commit on every edit at one point), what I actually ended up doing is that I hook into all Bash tool calls, look if there's a git commit in there, and if so, I prepend it with the right git env variables.
alansaber1 hour ago
Cool, we do the same thing, but we also denote when a line is "AI generated but was modified by a human" (aka human made anything upwards of a 1 character change).
- eighttrigrams41 minutes ago
  I'll probably be annoyed enough soon that I want that level of granularity, too
gritzko3 hours ago
Interesting. I use annotations for that. But even if agents ignore them 1 out of 100 cases, I have enough cases here to see it happen.
krupkinmaxim4 minutes ago
[flagged]
vancekai2 hours ago
[dead]