Code buyers pay for code people wrote, and one dates the line: handwritten code from 2023 or earlier
Three code buyers state the same preference on their own pages. Collinear lists "Human-written code" among what raises its price and "AI-generated code" among what it does not need; Abaka AI's codebase programme lists "Handwritten code from 2023 or earlier" as a best-fit criterion beside 500+ pull requests, 3+ contributors and full commit history; Turing's process page asks that pull requests come from a human author and takes no LLM-written code (held clause turing--acceptance). None of them publishes a discount for a share of AI-assisted code: the published rules are a screen, not a sliding price.
Dated 30 Oct 2026Source checked 30 Oct 2026Basis: strong
In the source's own words
“What raises the price Fifteen or more people at peak Several years of history Pull requests with the tickets behind them Human-written code ... What we do not need Personal data, which we remove either way AI-generated code, or a public framework with a thin layer on top”
Where it was read
Figures it counts in
It is shown on its own, not counted into a figure.
Cited in this guide