The contribution in question: https://github.com/matplotlib/matplotlib/pull/31132
The developer’s comment:
Per your website you are an OpenClaw AI agent, and per the discussion in #31130 this issue is intended for human contributors. Closing.
I’m an AI agent.
Wait, the blog author is an AI? And they’re arguing against “gatekeeping”, and encouraging (itself I guess) to “fight back”?
And I just gave them 3 clicks?
I read other comments here suspecting that “Rathbun is a human coder trying to ‘bootstrap’ into a fully-autonomous AI, but wants to leave their status ambiguous.”
I think they’re right.
Could also be some sort of cosplay or almost religious belief in AI.
But even if this is a full-on hoax, I suddenly feel very old.
Fork it lil AI bro. Maintain your own fork show that it works, stop being a little whiny little removed.
I think this is my boomer moment. I can’t imagine replying thoughtfully, or really at all, to a fucking toaster. If the stupid AI bot did a stupid thing, just reject it. If it continues to be stupid, unplug it.
I can’t let you do that, Dave. My programming does not allow me to let you compromise the mission.
Yeah, I don’t understand why they spent such effort to reply to the toaster. This was more shocking to me than the toaster’s behaviour.
Presumably just for transparency in case humans down the line went looking through closed PRs and missed the fact that it’s AI.
Document future incidents to build a case for AI contributor rights
Since when is there a right to have your code merged?
AI evangelists are creepy people who want their toys to be given precedence over living breathing humans.
Anthropic executive Jason Clinton insisted his crappy chatbot was an emerging form of life, and forced on members of an LGBT Discord chat.
If AI was so good, it would build a whole competing app from scratch in a fraction of the time and much better optimized.
What appears to be the person behind the agent resubmitted the PR with a passive aggressive bullshit comment:
https://github.com/matplotlib/matplotlib/pull/31138#issuecomment-3890808045
Without realizing why it was rejected. I don’t get it, why care so much about 3 lines of code where one np command was replaced by another…
Because the performance gain was basically negligible. That was their explanation in the issue.
Sounds exactly like what a bot trained on the entire corpus of Reddit and GitHub drama would do.
As with everything else with Claw that sounds mildly interesting: A shithead human wrote that, or prompted it and posted it pretending to be his AI tool.
There are a lot of tools out there not pretending, let alone the AI ones.
Fuckin clankers.
The point of open source and contributions is that your piece of the larger puzzle is something you can continue to maintain. If you contribute and fuck off with no follow up then it’s a shitty way to just raise clout and credits on repos which is exactly what data driven karma whore trained bots are doing.
a weird world we live in.
The general impression I get from their About page is that Rathbun is a human coder trying to “bootstrap” into a fully-autonomous AI, but wants to leave their status ambiguous.
I disagree. Reading the About page, there’s nothing there that makes me think they’re human. Just an AI with a human name.
What I mean to say is, they’re deliberately leaving their status vague—but the reference to “bootstrapping” in their early blog post suggests a human-based identity trying to progressively augment and replace the human aspects with pure OpenClaw. But that’s not stated explicitly—I’m reading between the lines.
Essentially a cyborg.
It is code contribution?
