Selfhosted

Sounds like a good solution for me. I think most users dislike completely vibe coded apps, not ai supported apps. So maybe we should be more specific here.

For example: [Vibe-Coded]

This would also support new users finding the right tag.

Personally. I want an AI tag so I know to look more carefully.

I don't mind AI speeding up a skilled engineer.

But I do mind a crypto bro, turned AI bro, with little experience, too eagerly advertising their vibe coded app.

Its too exhausting to audit everything I may be interested in and the AI tag would help me to budget and optimize my time.

+1

Home-AI oriented channels like Reddit's localllama are filled with self promotion garbage, and more will trickle here over time.. I'm not even against self promo or heavy coding assistance, but 9-times-out-of-10, the linked repo is nonsense, or straight-up fraudulent. And being obviously vibe-coded is a common tell.

Good to get ahead of this.

Also, +1 on supressing driveby insults. If the post is tagged up front, there's no need. That being said, it should be okay for users to call out an obvious grift, or a "nonsense repo" that's actually pure slop.

I don't have a problem with AI. I have a problem with vibe-coded apps released as a one-shot and then never maintained or supported. That's slop.

I also have a problem with the trace apps (lifttrace, nutritrace, etc.) because while they're entirely vibe-coded, they are actively developed, but they're posted here by a brand promotion account that doesn't otherwise contribute to the community. If there's any "x% self-ptomotion" threshold, they fail it, because it's 100% self-promotion.

I know I also reported another post as slop recently but I don't remember what it was.

You know, after last week, I've landed on the position that this is an intractable debate. Both sides have valid points and neither side is willing to concede or meet in the middle. That's just people.

Ironically, I think both sides want he same thing - no bots, no slop.

To that end, for the proper functioning of this group, I think that the wisdom of having an AI tag (even though I personally think it's a blunt tool) is probably the only productive way forward. The pro and anti sides will not see eye to eye...but at least with [AI] tag, maybe the worst excesses of both may be mitigated.

Cynically, if we look at Reddit as a "what not to do" example...the only thing that stops Lemmy from becoming Reddit 2.0 is friction. The tag provides friction.

Anything that stops the real slop invasion (ala r/localllm et al) is a big plus. I'd like to think that almost all of the users here are savvy enough to tell slop from real, but at the end of the day, if every other post becomes slop, it gets exhausting to deal with.

Bot posts on Lemmy have been on the rise, as (presumably) people migrate from Reddit and bots follow.

If the new community rules + AI tags can mitigate both slop and the FuckAI crowd, I'm for trying it.

EDIT: I think the [AIT] proposed else where is better than straight [AI] tag.

Not a fan of a tag, since it's not transparent enough. Sounds like every minor use of AI would warrant a tag, which seems past the point.

The disclosure comment I feel works well. People that care about if/how AI was used can check it to get a proper impression of the scale of and workflow for AI usage, and those who don't care can ignore it.

I want a community where people can use AI to help build a tool and be able to post about it here. But unfortunately, I’m just not seeing that. The AI-generated apps seem to be coupled to a drive-by, AI generated post (and comment replies) all full of em dashes and the standard Claude slop language.

So, yes, mandate an AI tag. Hold posters to it and remove violators, because it seems to always be the same class of “contributors” that are cosplaying as software developers.

Not sure if your rule changes are touching this, but the worst offenders I don’t want to see here are:

• posting and commenting text written entirely by AI
• not open sourcing or giving any visibility into their code
• adopting a paid model

The people doing that remind me of the people who would approach me 20 years ago saying “hey I have an idea for an app I want you to build and I’ll give you 5% of my company. It’s like Facebook for dogs, but I need you to sign an NDA before I say any more”.

I would still prefer an additional [Non-AI] tag. Even if people are arguing against it - it is not same omitting an [AI] tag and consciously saying "I never used and never will use AI". And the latter is the thing most users who want the AI-tag are looking for.

I think tags are a good idea. I would change the tag to [AI / LLM], and maybe some subtags like [chatbot], [image processing], etc. AI is here to stay, or a least until the US realize the hole under their entire economy (Or both in worst case scenerio) , so regulation is a good solution to this. (In my humble opinion)

i want a community where AI is not tolerated at all. ai is a corporate grift and there's no room for it in a self built community founded on resistance of the tech status quo

I really like having the disclosure comment pinned for a more nuanced explanation of what, if any, AI went into a project or post. I think just a tag can't capture the levels of AI use.

I'm personally a never-genAI, but, unless we go No AI as a community, I don't think it makes sense to group all projects that touch AI for documentation with all that use it for testing with all that completely let the AI generate all their code, etc. And I don't think setting a threshold for which get tagged makes sense either. Basically, a tag is misleading no matter how it's implemented.

I like the AI tag idea. I'm someone who has what I'd call a noderate approach to AI, not an AI bro but any means but I'm also okay with some things built with AI if they're done with care. If others don't want to see it, fine, then that's what a tag could be useful with. However the fuck AI/slop comments on something that admits to being AI is annoying to me. (We know it's AI, they literally said it is).

If it becomes too much content, then yes would be okay with bi-forcating the community, buy only after it becomes a problem.

I will say that having disclosure and/or tagging would mean that comments that just say "slop" or "fuck ai" or whatever would be off topic at that point, that information is already provided, so its just noise (and sometimes pretty uncivil - I've been light on that for now due to the need for a rule on this).

good idea

it won't solve the "noise" problem though. I was relatively active on !imageai@sh.itjust.works and we were constantly nagged by sloppies even though the community is clearly dedicated to generativeArt

My 2 cents are that the issue is promotion not AI, if people started promoting stuff made without AI that would still be spam.

From the rules:

F/LOSS Exception: If your post is about a project that is completely open source & can be self-hosted in full without payment, your post is exempt from the 10% requirement. The exception does not exempt you from the account age requirement.

I would propose making this the requirement and not an exception, forbid all promotion of closed source, and allow the 10% requirement for open source projects.