I think a blanket ban would make people try and hide the fact that something is ai. Like it or not ai isn’t going away. I feel disclosure in either the title or body is the better choice. By all means ban those blatantly not adhering to the disclosure rule though.

Tags in Lemmy would be really helpful here as users could chose yo filter out all ai related posts from their feed, though a similar effect can come through requiring a keyword like “[AI]” to be in the title and a user end keyword filter.

Greg is vibe coding a tool that he needs. Greg does not share it or monetize it since Greg knows this tool is likely unmaintainable shit and buggy asf. Be like Greg.

Yes, please ban them. If not, soon this space will get overrun with those losers. This is what happened to r/fossdroid and r/opensource. 90% of posts there are from sloppers. It got really bad to the point regulars stopped participating, and now these subreddits are mostly just sloppers congratulating each others. Every post reads the exact fucking same, every project looks fucking similar, even comments. These people barely put effort anywhere.

This is a community for people to share and communicate, else we can all just talk to LLMs. Please don’t let that happen to this community.

At the very least, make posters require to have an AI tag on their posts and a separate day for them to showcase their “projects”.

Please don’t reply saying but Linux uses LLMs, or other whataboutisms. There is a significant difference between code quality from people submitting to Linux and a slopper who vibecoded a project thinking they’re helping.

I’m in favor just requiring AI-generated code to be tagged in some obvious place in the post. If there’s a full restriction on it, I think quite a few people would just try to hide the fact that it was vibe-coded and post anyway,

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.

There’s no value in AI slop and it should be banned from everywhere in all circumstances.

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.

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.

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).

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.

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.

Yes, ban AI usage and the slop it gives

Yes please. No AI at all. Assisted, human reviewed, none of it. Only fully human written code.