497
Ban AI Slop? (lemmy.ml)
submitted 2 weeks ago by [M] to c/opensource@lemmy.ml
168 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I had a report for AI slop today. 1m LOC in 3 months. How do you even modify and distribute that? I do not think we had a rule against it.

IMHO if we allow, the community gets drowned out by AI vomit and it is harder to see handcrafted loved projects that are easy to modify and distribute.

My mind is to ban it to preserve open source.

Are folk in agreememt with this line? Would love to hear your thoughts.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 95 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

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

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 53 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

    Agreed. TLDR, you must tag posts there with the following:

    Post Tagging

    There are three types of tags for project promotional / AI posts.

    • [CBH] - Code By Human - A project promotional post with a project that did not use AI in any capacity. No disclosure necessary.
    • [AIP] - AI Project - A project promotional post with a project that used AI in development in any capacity. Disclosure is required for how it was used.
    • [AIT] - AI Topic - A discussion topic that includes AI. This may be for a discussion on hardware to self-host on, llama.cpp vs ollama, your experience using vulkan, etc.
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 24 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

    Thanks for sharing this. Maybe correct tagging could be useful. Makes it easier to ignore but not overly heavy and possibly toxic.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    Thanks for sharing this. Maybe correct tagging could be useful. Makes it easier to ignore but not overly heavy and possibly toxic.

    If i am just posting these projects i found which i think are interesting (which i did a lot of). i am now suppose to spend more of my spare time researching if they include AI? I am pretty sure i won't be able to know most of the time .

    There are not a a lot of projects i think people will be interested enough to do a "high effort evaluation". if anyone is that interested he can just ask, or check out the code which should be fairly rare.

    AI has been here for a while. If it would have caused FOSS communities to be flooded by AI it probably would have happened by now. We should try and avoid the bias of risk aversion.

    Looking at AI . it reminds me of how for wayland there was constant criticism even if it was just plain wrong and just made people overly scared . the plain wrong stuff was highly upvoted and i didn't always have time to correct it, plus people being disrespectful discouraged me from discussing it because i didn't feel it will be productive . now wayland is pretty much accepted as "good" by most of the FOSS social media communities in my experience. when a new technology appears. it takes time and effort to study it deeply and it's advantages and disadvantages . And i suspect people in social media are often not the first to do that honestly.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago*

    On /c/selfhosted, you share someone else's project without the disclosure. Age of account requirement is still there, though, has to be at least 30 days old.

    If youre aware of some level of ai involvement when posting, its encouraged to mention. If they have an ai disclosure in their repo and you link it, even better.

    But since its impossible for a 3rd party to know development details, disclosure doesn't apply. Assuming something similar is done here, that wouldn't be a concern.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 1 week ago

    @CrypticCoffee@lemmy.ml if you have any questions on those rules, please let me know.

    The disclosure was needed because there is a wide variety of LLM use, which you can see in the explanation post as well. There is a rather wide difference between "I used an LLM to summarize my changes in the readme" and "I generated everything here from a single prompt".

    The disclosure addresses that part, while the tags allow people to choose what to interact with or what to filter.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent