Join the discussion
Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.
- Hacker News
- Weird given how much Oracle has bet on AI, both in terms of data centres and in terms of layoffs.by bhouston
- The irony is not lost there. But at least some department there has see the light apparentlyby rootnod3
- People behind JVM are very talented.by afroboy
- So contributions to OpenJDK have to be hand-written, while internally, Oracle uses AI generated code... I guess the logic is that employees who use AI generated code (theoretically) review their code better? The whole thing still seems a little strange.
- It is not when you stop kidding yourself : using AI has nothing to do to improve the quality of the code. It is a vanity status, at this point.by Contient
- No I'm sure they are just paranoid about license rights.by bpodgursky
- I don't know. I think it makes sense to have a policy like this.
I haven't written a line of code myself in 6 months, but the point is that _you shouldn't be able to tell_
What I tell people at work: Using AI is good. AI can help you do things that you otherwise wouldn't have. It shouldn't be a crutch for thinking.
In that sense, people shouldn't be able to tell that you're using AI unless the tell is that it's _higher quality_ than if you had implemented it by hand.
A good example here is a well-written document that has a _ton_ of deep research behind it. Or code that has extensive tests that would have taken too long to write by hand for the task at hand.
It's bad when it's just "do this thing and post a PR" but I write my code with AI, look at it as a reviewer, offer suggestions, put those into my steering if needed, and I refine it. The way I see it, I'm the first reviewer on everything now before passing it off to another human for review.
There have been points where having AI rewrite something was slower than me doing it, but I'm already in the harness. The cost of waiting is almost zero. What stops me from contributing to the JVM using AI written code that I understand and spent time manicuring? Can a human really tell that it's AI written?
by cheeze - No, their internal PRs have the same problem, but they are pushing an AI narrative from the c-suite and can hide the reality of their private code bases.
The "limited ROI on AI investment" articles will continue to percolate slowly into the brains of the LinkedIn hive-mind until we hit a tipping point, and then we'll finally shut up about how a handy dev tool with some decent use-cases is the dawning of the singularity that will replace all white collar labor and get back to actually building business value.
by jknoepfler - So Java, which powers a sizeable chunk of the real-world since two decades now, without needing the help of LLMish sloppy-pasta, is going to continue to power the Real World [TM] with its language and JVM that have been created with tens of millions of human man-hours without LLMish sloppy-pasta?
I'm shocked.
I'm not only shocked: I also see there a delicious irony in the countless of LLMish sloppy-pasta code that's now running and going to be run on man-made JVMs.
- > countless of LLMish sloppy-pasta code that's now running and going to be run on man-made JVMs.
Don’t worry, I think most LLMs, when starting a greenfield codebase, don’t reach for Java, so it may be a smaller amount of code affected than you feared.
by msdz - Closer to three decades than two.by asadotzler
- I didn't know openjdk was developed by Oracle. I always thought it was a community implementation of java as opposed to Oracle's proprietary implementation.by jiffygist
- Yeah its like George Lucas, doesn't matter you care for the Jedis or the Dark Side or even Jar Jar, he owns them all.by pmkary
- It was Sun's project before Oracle bought Sun. Sun worked a lot with Netscape back in the day to make Open Source Software happen at all. From 1998-2004ish, Netscape and Sun were the open source projects and the strongest proponents of the licensing and development models. Oracle absorbed all that good will with the purchase.by asadotzler
- Sun's JDK implementation was made open source (GPLv2) in 2006 and dubbed OpenJDK.by jibal
- It is a community implementation although the vast majority of contributions come from Oracle staff. RedHat, in particular, has made numerous contributions.
- From the page https://openjdk.org/legal/ai -
"6 Is it okay to continue using the spell-checking, grammar-checking, auto-completion, and refactoring features in my editor or IDE?
Yes, so long as they are not based on large language models or similar deep-learning systems."
by StatsAreFun - Completely delusional they are.by inigyou
- Not too different from the recently-announced Rust guidelines at https://blog.rust-lang.org/inside-rust/2026/08/05/rust-langr...by gred
- y’all seem to be missing the fact that Java is a mature product. it has left the “move fast and break things” era of it’s development.
code is a liability, and they likely have more to lose than gain by allowing AI contribution.
by mcdow - Oracle Java is also basically effectively in KTLO mode.
The biggest use of Java currently is Android, and Google is on a path to migrate to Fuchsia eventually.
The second biggest use is Apache Spark/Kafka, but with LLMs now, you can pretty much re implement all of that functionality in pure C.
They just want a legal angle, since this is how they make most of their money.
by ActorNightly - It's a clear admission that AI generated/assisted code is inadequate.
It's shocking given Oracle's AI spending spree over the last couple of years.
by dan_q - Java was never "move fast and break things".
- >it has left the “move fast and break things
java never had that phase. If anything it had a full binary class (not even source, e.g. long and int are not compatible on binary level) compatibility. Generally you can take an application from '98 and run it nowadays.
It's only recent changes (jigsaw in java9 mostly) that were made them to drop some of that part.
by xxs - I kind of get their overall point, even if it is ironic that Oracle is all in on AI. They don’t want a ton of contributions to review that weren’t made with care, adding burden to, as they put it: “already limited time of human reviewers”.
Especially for a project that runs to many major businesses, this could pose a massive risk.
by cautiouscat - Probably has less to do with quality and more of a copyright/license concern.by thewebguyd
- Any way you spin it, the message remains clear --- dealing with AI slop is just too labor intensive and risky.
Do as Larry does --- not as Larry claims to do.
I would short his stock but it has already lost half it's value over the past year. And his credit rating is one notch above junk.
AI is going to make fools out of a lot of billionaires like Larry.
by jqpabc123 - > even if it is ironic that Oracle is all in on AI
Selling it is one thing. Having to use it one's self is quite another.
by chrisjj - Oracle is primarily a legal department that sells software licenses to give their lawyers something to extract money from customers with.
Google “Oracle org chart meme” and look at image results, only it’s not a meme.
- (bit sarcastic) Oracle was always all in on Lawyers, right? No software was their first priority.by blmarket