23
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2026
23 points (96.0% liked)
Open Source
50074 readers
306 users here now
All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!
Useful Links
- Open Source Initiative
- Free Software Foundation
- Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Software Freedom Conservancy
- It's FOSS
- Android FOSS Apps Megathread
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to the open source ideology
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
- !libre_culture@lemmy.ml
- !libre_software@lemmy.ml
- !libre_hardware@lemmy.ml
- !linux@lemmy.ml
- !technology@lemmy.ml
Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.
founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
I've checked its girhub before and photocraft has a lot of contributors, over 400. But the apps are made mostly by claude code. Personally id never use these apps but so far theyvebeen receiving updates quickly with humans adding new bugfixes (humans or maybe more vibe coders...).
I installed the flatpak out of curiosity and these artxraft apps receive updates fast in my opinion, a d they add more things like a reverse engineer app or solidcraft thing.
in my opinion, even with human bugfixes and that, its still slop, I trust other foss alternatives.
This raises another question I've been kicking around in my head for a while - at what point does a slop project stop being slop? Say I one shot a slop app and then continue to iterate on it with human-written commits. Or I find a vibe coded app I think has potential, fork it and then iterate on it. At what point does this become non-slop, or does it ever?
In my opinion is possible to stop being slop, if an app is very well made thanks to human checks (like fix garbage code made by llms). Llms can't be trusted to competely write code imo, but if a good programmer knows how to use llms to improve their workflow I think that's a good llm usage.
artcraft apps are too new and still have a lot of bugs, but maybe someday it will be more useful in my opinion.
If the code is checked by humans, like on the linux kernel for example, id say I trust it. And I dont think its slop.
and llms have great uses for programming in my opinion, like the opensuses OpenQA, etc. ai has found cves on linux too which is a great usage for it. what I disloke its that some people think that by using tons of tokens they can be programmers by just prompting something...
Artcraft, has a problem that they release quantity over quality, there are like 15 apps now and they aren't well tested... but who knows, maybe in the future it gets better. Maybe id change my mind of it being slop
I keep hearing people talk about trust, and it's really doesn't make sense to me because we've never done software development based on trust. Humans make mistakes all the time, and I've seen plenty far worse human code than anything an LLM has crapped out over my career. The way we ensure quality is through having a process. It's done by having good specifications, testing, code reviews, planning, and so on. All these things equally apply to code written by hand and that's generated by an LLM, and trust has nothing to do with it.