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?

  • ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    +1 to remove them. 99% of those AI projects will go unmaintained and abandoned after a year, and their use more often than not impedes socialist efforts due to directly or indirectly supporting fascists tech companies.

    1. Simply using an AI that’s run on a corporate data centers encourages the construction of yet more data centers, with all of the environmental/climate negatives they bring, as well as local harms they induce on the people living near them, such as increased electricity rates.

    2. Using corporate AI directly helps the financial situations of those giant corporations (by boosting usage/user numbers, they are able to attract more investment capital), most of which are ran by right-wing CEOs who are more than willing to collaborate with and fund fascist governments to ensure that they are not regulated in search of both maximum profits. Some of these companies, such as Nvidia, Palantir and Oracle, genuinely appear to be seeking to use these tools for what would previously be considered crackpot conspiracy theory levels of public control and surveillance.

  • vas@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago
    • I think AI disclosure has to be a hard rule. Not done properly? Remove.
    • I think there has to be a threshold of when to allow, otherwise we’ll get (and are already) overwhelmed. For example, be X months old is an easy check that would filter out low-effort posting.

    Besides these basic rules that I think are absolutely mandatory, I’m not sure how far to go. I’d want to say that the project needs to explain Free Software affinity or explain why it’s posted on lemmy or something like that… But it’s so easy to fake it with, the irony of it, AI texts.

    In conclusion,

    • Decision-wise, I wouldn’t mind if the resolution is the full removal on AI-driven projects.
    • Decision-wise, I would absolutely request a hard-ban if the lemmy text is AI-written.
    • Decision-wise, I could accept if the rule is to accept some small sliver of AI posts that would come our way otherwise. Maybe some projects where AI assists in writing code, but does not replace the programmer. Maybe that is OK, if the project otherwise is “relevant to the open source ideology” (Rule 1 of this community).

    EDIT: Also, something to think about is… community, not just code. For community health, it might be better to remove AI-driven projects entirely. Because we aren’t just about code. We’re also about continuing to exist long-term.

    EDIT 2: I think codeberg actually did it better than my improvised thinking. I’d go with codeberg’s rules: https://blog.codeberg.org/protecting-our-floss-commons-from-llms.html

  • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    There’s no such thing as “AI”. Nothing to disclose.

    Even if there were something to disclose, people don’t know how much of their dependencies were computer generated. It’s a purity test.

    But all apps should be vetted for malware, etc.

  • motruck@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Require a tag but if someone wants to share something that solved a problem for them as an open source project they should be able to.

  • idriss@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    16 hours ago

    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.

  • Inui [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    18 hours ago

    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.

  • WardPearce@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    102
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    AI slop & AI code is very different. If its just pure vibe coded slop with no oversight or effort, then sure its just junk, remove it.

    But a lot of experienced developers now use AI tooling to increase productivity, just because AI was used in the process should be consider it slop?

    • JustEnoughDucks@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      18 hours ago

      The self-hosted community has a very good take in my opinion. Especially facing the fact that new slop vaporware often comes with new accounts that just advertise the “product”.

      Disclosure about AI use, account minimums, and mods having discretion to ban obvious junk spam.

    • MalReynolds@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Agreed. Needs to be disclosed in the title of the post as having AI involvement, and show signs of active maintenance. Anyone can now oneshot some slop that’s nothing but a waste of our time, but it takes good developers to maintain, secure and expand.

      5 days old, nope, hasn’t been touched in months, nope. Dozens of active human participants, and/or a reasonable history of active development and to a lesser degree stars or equivalent, sure.

      It’s a bit more work for a poster, but I think it can keep quality high for project posts. Should be voted on by the community and made a rule.