Maybe start out with strict labeling guidelines. If it's AI then it should be labeled as such. If a user posts something that's Ai and doesn't label it then ban that user. Maybe a warning first up to you.

But if the choice is between blanket everything allowed or blanket ban I lean more toward blanket ban.

I'm team "no slop allowed", but you have to define what slop is somehow.

I think there's a bunch of metrics to consider, but it might be difficult to assess as a mod.

+1 for the option self hosted went with - AI use must be labeled. It allows those of us that don't want to see it to easily filter it out.

I saw that million lines of code in 3 months but also when I saw the post title I really just had a feeling that's what it was to begin with. On one hand it's kinda cool that just about anyone can make a program that does what they want, but on the other side of it I understand LLM generated code and bot submitted pulls are literally killing beloved FLOSS projects. This greatly saddens me. A good friend of mine quit contributing to projects she used to enjoy helping develop because rather than read her code, an LLM the lead dev fed it through claimed her code was AI generated. It's fucked and causing brain rot of the worst kind.

But I also want to acknowledge that in the hands of a professional developer/coder LLMs are a valuable tool. But a person needs to be able to read and understand and verify the generated code.... All this to say is that I think we need a sane and nuanced approach. Let's not start a witch hunt, let's just put labels on boxes and let the community decide what it wants to view or filter out.

Yeh I’d prefer no slop. You’d probably also need to clarify what the definition or threshold for this might be. Just the code? Slop docs? LLM used for any aspect whatsoever? Other communities must have a definition that might help. But your goals with it as stated are sound. Let’s not drown in vomit.

+1 to banning AI projects.

Since speaking directly to the proposed change didn’t do much, here’s an alternative to “banning ai slop”:

Ban the thing that’s happening. If there are too many “low effort” posts, ban low effort posting. If there are too many posts about non open source packages, ban posting about non open source software. If you really don’t want people self promoting with open source (a thing they’ve been doing for decades!) then ban self promotion.

The problem with all the things I just suggested is that they require serious consideration on the part of a moderator. “Is this post too low effort?”, “is this person promoting themselves in a way the community doesnt want?” and “is this post even about open source?” Are questions that require moderator effort. “Was the repo signed by Claude?” Takes no effort to answer.

Of course kicking kids out of the sandbox for not playing right kind of defeats the purpose of a sandbox and placing unnecessarily high barriers to entry on the commons defeats the purpose of a commons but what the hell do I know…

define slop. it means different things to different people.

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.

Ban it, lemmy sets itself apart from places like reddit by having fewer but actually good quality posts.

AI slop is completely against this.

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

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

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.

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.

Yea I think so. If the idea is too controversial we could make an open source AI community so everyone is happy.

Completely vibe coded - yes

AI assisted - no

Please

Let people choose by their owns. In my client, I can filter by texts; I already used to hide some topics. Maybe it's more convenient to include a tag in the title. For example: if your contribution/project is made by or include generated content from a LLM, include the tag [AI]. That way, anyone can hide these contributions by filtering by the text "[AI]".

I had a report for AI slop today. 1m LOC in 3 months. How do you even modify and distribute that?

That makes some sense but does "AI slop" here refer to code with this type of problem or all code made with AI assistance?

Let people choose what they want to see.

People here tend to call any hint of LLM use "slop", and arguing on a threshold is a waste of everyone's time that will end up disappointing most. Tag it and let people choose.

Yes, ban AI usage and the slop it gives

Yes

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

Yes to ban 👍

Tag and '[AI]' in title if not ban. But would very much like it if such posts were simply banned. I don't think the community would loose any value.

I do not think a ban would be efficient. It would just force those who use AI to dissimulate it. I see it a bit as drug use, banning hasn't solved the problem ; and the countries who handled it the best were those regulating the use.

So I think we should look for a good regulation. It is more complicated to set up, but it has a chance to work.

In my mind, it should allow some projects to identify as not using any AI, and request that each project define what is their use of AI. Ideally, we could know this without opening the project (maybe thanks to a badge).

Also, shaming the use of AI only has the same aim as banning it: forcing it to grow hiden and out of control.

While I'm personally against AI coded projects I've noticed more and more that the best projects for my homelab have either turned into AI coded projects or started as one. I first and foremost look into alternatives and weigh in if the features in the AI coded projects are needed over the one that isn't. But it's been harder and harder over the years and months to find projects without it.

While I see the different spectrums of fully supporting it, to seeing it as a tool to outright hate it and disregarding everything with it completely I'm mostly curious where does the line go?

When can you spot a good developer that uses it and when can you spot a bad one?

1 million lines of code in one month from a hugely experienced coder vs a developer with none?

Without deeply vetting the developer and their history and their other projects code how would it be best done?

I only really do SvelteKit stuff for example, some bash scripting too, so I can't spot code efficiency in other languages like Rust or Go.

I'm on the stance that I always avoid to the best of my ability AI coded projects because I don't believe that AI can generate code that is efficient and secure in the long run. I know of a few self hosted projects that has been used to some extent with AI and has gotten reaaaalllyyy bad security patches.

I had a report for AI slop today. 1m LOC in 3 months.

I don't understand this, is it human slop?

Would love to hear your thoughts.

AI is here and not going away. Almost every programmer I know, professionally and hobby, uses it to a greater or lesser extent.

We have plenty of crap software in foss that was authored by people, always have, even when it was called public domain. I've certainly shared crap code going back over three decades and I don't need a clanker to make it bad.

Bad software gets rejected or unused because it's not very good. Why can't those same standards apply whoever or whatever created it?

The only thing I think is important, is to be honest.