We’ve been getting a lot of AI coded submissions recently, as well as lots of reports asking to remove them.
Should we remove these posts, or not?
Just make people disclose it in the title
I vote to remove myself but I’d be fine with just having to state AI involvement
My secret non-disclosed own policy on projects I control: if I realize you used LLMs, the change will be rejected. There are people who use LLMs but still it’s 100% their change and design, they just didn’t type it by themselves and you cannot figure out.
I’m not anti-AI but would caution you to see what has been done to communities like /r/selfhosted after the vibe coders found it. Every other post is about a project that has severe memory leaks, over engineered code for simple tasks, and significant security risks especially if someone stupidly opens it up to the internet. These people are putting others in danger with their ignorance even if they think they are ‘helping’. Maybe disclosures will work fine for a smaller forum like this, but elsewhere, the sheer volume makes it unmanageable.
Allow them. Anti-AI hate is kneejerk sentiment. AI is the future whether your sentiments agree with it or not, and it’s a major enablement tool for OSS developers.
Remove.
Require an AI tag for anything written in part or in whole by AI.
Depends on the definition. If we go by the definition a lot of users here seem to have, Linux itself would no longer be considered a FOSS project, which imo is completely ridiculous.
If we’re talking about literally vibe coded from the ground up projects where the devs don’t even know what the code inside looks like, yes maybe it should be removed or given a post tag once we have the feature.
Personally I prefer to keep a discussion going even with heavy AI coded projects, we’re living in interesting times and I am convinced to keep an open mind about what engineering will look like going forward and what doors it might open for the FOSS community despite its flaws and negatives.
As others have said in other posts, the cat’s out of the bag. No matter if/when/how bad the AI crash is, if computing is still viable after then there will be AI.
I think eventually it will emerge that the highest quality AI code will be produced by already experienced developers, who can identify when it’s produced slop and fix it, and that will be the case no matter how good the models get.
I of think of it somewhat like managing a team of interns. You give them instructions and they give you code. You still have to know enough to identify if that code meets the requirements and is of good quality.
I’m gonna agree with others that there need to be standards not a blanket ban. I’d leave it up to the admins/mods what those are. Because getting too granular with it wold be hard to enforce. You guys pick something you feel is reasonable and will cut down on 0 effort slop but also allows you to enforce things without digging through the minutia of every post.
100%
The question of banning “AI slop” is a bit of a loaded one. Yes all slop should be banned. But banning all AI related/engineered work is insane.
I advocate for a disclosure, blanket removal feels like censorship; even vibe coded slop is a project that might generate interest if it was made to solve some problem or showcase a new frontier, nature of OSS will push the slop out of the project eventually.
When I say “slop”, I refer to a huge codebase that does what it advertise but has no documentation on what it does internally and the primary poster cannot adequately explain what it does(code mudball esentially). but if its well documented and looks like it was put together with care, with rhyme and reason than I will defend against calling it slop
I think requiring AI disclosure like how !selfhosted@lemmy.world does is a good approach. Not all projects rely as heavily on LLMs as others.
Remove them. There’s nothing “open source” about the outputs of your black box text generator
Rule 1 says Posts must be relevant to the open source ideology
I don’t think any ai projects can claim to be that when their copyright status is debatable and the tooling is worse with how closed their training is.
People against LLM parrot the same arguments again and again that it has simply lost its original meaning.
copyright status is debatable
debatable by who? who is going to settle this debate?, the courts who serve corporate greed?, Legislation made by politicians lobbied by SaaS companies? Anthropic? OpenAi? Microsoft?
The “Copyright is debatable/ its just a plagiarism machine” stance is not the Leftist/ pro FOSS gotcha argument you think it is. The point of the FOSS movement was to have total freedom over software, and that freedom includes the ability to study, learn and use it in ways it was not intended for. To stand as the antitheses of that is make Steve Balmer happy
Since when has development tooling mattered for something to be FOSS? If it relies on propietary software to build or run it then there’s an argument it’s not truly free.
But if we’re saying that anything developed using closed source tools is not allowed then we’ll have to throw out anything that was developed on a mac or Windows PC.
You are just adding your oss preferences to open source here. I too have preferences, like no corp oss, no ads, no logins, no telemetry and so on, but i have to accept oss as oss more broadly.
I would recommend that you set your agent to filter out posts you don’t want, but you would likely rather censor this sub than automate it with an agent…
You are just adding your oss preferences to open source here.
OSS == Open-Source Software, what are you talking about
I would recommend that you set your agent to filter out posts you don’t want
Just to be clear, do you mean that the user’s user agent (lemmy client) should be capable of filtering out posts about vibecoded slop, perhaps by having lemmy communities require such posts to be tagged? Or do you mean that a LLM should curate what users see here?
Posts must be relevant to the open source ideology
Did you not read the full rule?
How can something that is inherently closed sourced be in line with that rule?
I’ll tug on that thread… so can we not use Windows or macOS to develop OSS code on? It has to be on a Linux machine? What if the BIOS is closed source or it’s using binary blobs for the video drivers?
I am going to go the other way and say the more, the merrier. I like to see new and interesting things that someone did to scratch an itch or solve a problem. I may not use it or agree with how they developed it or the license they chose, etc., but I still like seeing the posts about it.
We had Slop before AI. we just called “shit”.
If a coder wants to shit out a project that never works and never patches it? I want them to notice the culture and know better.
If someone is learning, using the tools they have available, and shows a commitment to maintain their project? I want to see their work. I wanna see them get help from the community to be more literate in their own project, and in the full toolset they’re using.
Most of these vibecoded submissions are the former. Thank you for removing the fecalware. If the community decides it needs to remove AI at all to keep this up? Eh, there’s dbzer0.
