At the very least have the post author mark it as having AI involvement. Idk if there's an equivalent to reddit automoderator but any new app sharing post should be autoreplied by the automod to mark AI involvement.
Or some kind of tagging.
yes to a ban, these projects are worthless to most but their authors. and good for them, but they can keep their trash for themselves.
like 95% of new foss projects i see pop up are heavily ai-generated, and often in very unsubtle ways (line half the commits being "co-authored by" claude, that sort of thing)
it would be nice to have a community where we can share and discuss projects made by humans, so they don’t drown in the llm bile
Yes to ban 👍
These kinds of threads are great for finding new people to go in my block list.
We allow it on our large subreddits on reddit. What we do is use a bot to filter repos that are less than 3 months old.
People who vibe code slop just want to share their thing and then abandon it. A limit like that or even 6 months will kill majority of this sort of low effort crap. Most of these people just let Claude or whatever sign the repo as well, another easy way to catch slop.
Developers that develop and only use AI as a tool build great products still as they review all their code.
A blanket ban is just going to make people be more sneaky.
For me the most important thing is that something is free software. I've seen people advertise proprietary stuff in this community and have reported it, and nothing has been done. I don't know if that means my reports don't federate properly or if it's tacitly approved by the moderators. I know in the degoogle community there are "trusted' proprietary apps that are often recommended but this should not be the case in a free software or open source community. In any case, any rule that bans "AI slop" while allowing proprietary products is in my mind backwards.
Regarding "AI slop" I am generally in agreement with Codeberg's policy which states,
You must not share projects that mostly consist of code written by "generative AI"-tools (including services such as Claude, OpenAI Codex).
I suppose "mostly" is up to interpretation but for me this specifically targets vibecoded apps where there is no or very minimal human involvement. This may be heterodoxy but I actually don't think "an otherwise human-written codebase with a single line of LLM code" is the same thing as an entirely LLM generated codebase. I think there's room for nuance especially if the usage is disclosed (I don't think punishing transparency should be encouraged).
Maybe someone should open a ticket with Lemmy devs to add a user side option for "show ai" next to "show nsfw".
I don't block nsfw, but I do block image posts. I'd love to be able to wholesale block all AI tagged posts too.
Yes please. No AI at all. Assisted, human reviewed, none of it. Only fully human written code.
What is fully human written and how are you as a human(I assume) able to distinguish between what is laboriously typed and what is generated, here lets try this exercise and see if you can spot any difference Here is a code I have typed by hand
"smash":
push rbp
mov rbp, rsp
call "smash"
pop rbp
ret
and here is machine generated code with the prompt, the slop machine used here is a compiler
GCC take this C code void smash(){smash();} and make it executable
and here is the output
"smash":
push rbp
mov rbp, rsp
call "smash"
nop
pop rbp
ret
spoiler
please dont take this seriously
Yes, ban AI usage and the slop it gives
Never in my life have I wanted to read about or use an AI slop project.
I'm fine with a people asking for open source AI models or sharing projects they made with the help of AI but not completely vibecoded slop.
Yes please. It's dispiriting to regularly go through the cycle of seeing an interesting project pop up here, oh wait it's vibe-coded crap, nevermind...
At a bare minimum, it would be nice for users to tag their projects accordingly. You could, with a glance, realize there wouldn't be a point in investing your time/energy into a project that the creator had less investment in, themselves.
That seems to be the standard for everything else. Anything generated by AI should have a disclaimer.
yeah, I've since seen the suggestion for enforced tagging in the top comment, and I agree that it could be a good solution for allowing users to decide for themselves if they want to engage
Vibe coded code whose "author" understands the language and actively challenges the agent for his decisions in the interest of long term window is OK. Vibe coded coded that are one-off without any future prospects should be 100% banned.
I am convinced that, with the right tools, it's possible to damage 40 years of work within a few weeks.
Both the Linux Foundation and the EFF have permissive policies towards AI generated code, even Linus Torvalds accepts it as a tool.
Some FOSS projects that have AI generated code in it:
Should we ban them all? If so, this community would be either dead soon OR it would be hypocritical.
Or because they started pre-AI it's ok now? Shouldn't we care more about disclosure, policies, licensing, code quality and maintainability?
Users should downvote crappy software and crappy devs, regardless of the tool it was written with.
Experienced developers using AI as a tool and properly understanding their code base are not slop.
AI slop is when someone with no software development experience prompts a piece of software into existence without any understanding of how that piece of software actually works. The project's are usually heavily pushed by their creators in the initial couple of weeks of creation but are then quickly abandoned when the creator finally realizes neither they nor their AI can maintain the project. Essentially these kinds of projects flood the internet with low quality abandonware.
A newly created open source project coded using AI would be fine if the creators could prove that they understand how to maintain the project and keep it going beyond the initially promoted code and that kind of proof can only come with time.
The big problem is the sheer volume of low quality projects that get abandoned will cause the projects that actually have potential to become needles in haystacks.
I think there are multiple reasons to ban AI slop. One is that it can push out and dilute human-made content.
Another is that AI use is very resource intensive in an age that we're facing an accelerating climate crisis. Speaking of which, we're expecting a pretty extreme El Niño season this year.
Another is that AI companies are lobbying the US federal government in bad faith (up to and including the current discussions of slowdown), and really don't deserve any support or patronage.
I don't know if you were aware, but burgerland doesn't have a monopoly on LLM development. And nowadays there are competent models you can even run locally that work just fine for coding.
This whole trope that AI is very resource intensive is completely outdated, while people like you just keep parroting it uncritically. You're certainly not going to be solving extreme climate change by banning LLM assisted code on a niche community. This is the most lib brained take ever.
I anticipate for now AI contributions will be from hyperscale compute, rather than from private systems. There is a build cost of home-brew AI engines that is prohibitive for the most of us.
And that doesn't change that AI content will saturate the community and push out human-made content.
Please
Yes please, I'm so tired of seing AI crap projects that will be abandonned in a few months...
i'm so curious what the argument against banning AI slop would even be, lmao
It's the same argument for anything AI: "It's inevitable!"
Completely vibe coded - yes
AI assisted - no
I strongly disagree with this. The reality is that using LLMs to build things is becoming increasingly more common. And just because something is built using LLMs doesn't automatically make it slop or useless. There are plenty of genuinely useful open source projects built with these tools, and just because you're personally opposed to that is not a reason to ban them outright.
This is why we have the voting system on Lemmy as well. If people post slop whether it's human or LLM assisted, then it can get downvoted naturally. I also see zero evidence of this community drowning in any sort of slop.
Yeah I don't think we need slop projects being posted here. I know a lot of people are using these tools even for personal projects nowadays but tbh I'm not really interested in exploring any project heavily written by AI.
This was a problem in !selfhosted@lemmy.world and they've done a good job of dealing with it. You could take a look at that past discussion to see what worked / what didn't.
IMO there is an organized effort behind some of these new accounts pushing AI projects, and you need to deal with it in some form to stop them from coming
Agreed. TLDR, you must tag posts there with the following:
There are three types of tags for project promotional / AI posts.
All about open source! Feel free to ask questions, and share news, and interesting stuff!
Community icon from opensource.org, but we are not affiliated with them.