Yup, I’m posting another this week. Sorry.

This week I’m hoping we can wrangle a solution around AI and our selfhosted community. There are plenty of strong opinions (both pro and con), but one thing is for certain - there needs to be better disclosure in promo posts. Two options (that aren’t mutually exclusive):

  • Any posts of an AI focused, AI Developed, etc software gets an [AI] tag. No, a [Not-AI] tag is not needed to accomplish this, thats kind of a “non-golfer” sort of tag.
  • Comment requiring an AI disclosure response to every promo post, if its not detailed in the post itself. Specifics (generating docs for commands, translation, whole-boat vibe-coded this app, etc) would be requested.

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).

The tag [AI] would make it easy to filter out (or search for, if that’s your thing), but there is a wildly different degree of AI use out there, and from the posts with a positive score, its usually due to responsible AI use (translations, a snippet they had to do something obscure with, available to use with AI but doesn’t require it, whatever), which is why I think the disclosure has a place as a benefit to everyone.

Please provide any input or alternative options on this, and I can then put it to a vote like the last one. Comments seem to be the best approach without involving something off-site, but if you have a better idea/option, please share.

  • GooeyGlob@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Yes this is needed. Thank you for the proposal here.

    I would suggest that this probably needs to be really explicit about any AI involvement, i.e. a minimum if AI is used in any capacity in the coding process, it should require the tag. And ideally an explanation if it was used in other parts of the process.

    That last post that came up said they used AI ‘for code review only’. In my mind even that deserves the tag, because these terms are so easy to work around. Someone can ‘code up’ the following:

    #include <studio.h> int main(void) { printf(“Program that does X thing”;) }

    (yes, I know the main arguments are not written correctly. You get the point)

    and then have the AI reviewer ‘fix’ their code by doing all the actual work. A strict requirement for this tag, for any AI involvement in the creation of the code seems like the key. The code part is going to be where the security issues crop up, and where it’s really important to know who or what is producing the code you’re about to run on your home server.

    I think we’re fairly used to a world where people use templates for their websites, documentation, etc. AI use there bothers me less, but an honest disclaimer saying what the AI did would sure go a long way to reducing the hate comments. I think people will still drive-by downvote, but that can’t (and IMO really shouldn’t be) prevented. But without a rule, people aren’t going to be honest.

    The scary part is just how emboldened people feel nowadays to just entirely use an AI for all the coding, documentation, website, and then not even put their name on the project. These to me feel like borderline state actor trojan horses disguised as open-source projects.

    Legitimate open source developers can spend years writing code to do something very sinplle but useful, and for them to be drowned out by a bunch of completely AI driven, slop posts really bothers me.