967
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] DylanMc6@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 10 hours ago

A lot of programmers with thigh-high striped socks should take one for the team and take back Godot and such. Seriously!

[-] the_citizen@lemmy.world 29 points 18 hours ago

Why people try to contribute even if they don't work on their codes? Ai slop not helping at all.

[-] AnyOldName3@lemmy.world 13 points 7 hours ago

CV padding and main character syndrome.

[-] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 18 points 17 hours ago

just deny PRs that are obvious bots and ban them from ever contributing.

even better if you're running your own git instance and can outright ban IP ranges of known AI shitlords.

[-] sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz 12 points 14 hours ago
[-] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 11 points 11 hours ago

fuck em

If my own mother can't shame me, a glorified sex bot has a snowballs chance in hell of doing it.

[-] BitsAndBites@lemmy.world 81 points 1 day ago

It's everywhere. I was just trying to find some information on starting seeds for the garden this year and I was met with AI article after AI article just making shit up. One even had a "picture" of someone planting some seeds and their hand was merged into the ceramic flower pot.

The AI fire hose is destroying the internet.

[-] maplesaga@lemmy.world 18 points 19 hours ago

I fear when they learn a different layout. Right now it seems they are usually obvious, but soon I wont be able to tell slop from intelligence.

[-] badgermurphy@lemmy.world 15 points 18 hours ago

One could argue that if the AI response is not distinguishable from a human one at all, then they are equivalent and it doesn't matter.

That said, the current LLM designs have no ability to do that, and so far all efforts to improve them beyond where they are today has made them worse at it. So, I don't think that any tweaking or fiddling with the model will ever be able to do anything toward what you're describing, except possibly using a different, but equally cookie-cutter way of responding that may look different from the old output, but will be much like other new output. It will still be obvious and predictable in a short time after we learn its new obvious tells.

The reason they can't make it better anymore is because they are trying to do so by giving it ever more information to consume in a misguided notion that once it has enough data, it will be overall smarter, but that is not true because it doesn't have any way to distinguish good data from garbage, and they have read and consumed the whole Internet already.

Now, when they try to consume more new data, a ton of it was actually already generated by an LLM, maybe even the same one, so contains no new data, but still takes more CPU to read and process. That redundant data also reinforces what it thinks it knows, counting its own repetition of a piece of information as another corroboration that the data is accurate. It thinks conjecture might be a fact because it saw a lot of "people" say the same thing. It could have been one crackpot talking nonsense that was then repeated as gospel on Reddit by 400 LLM bots. 401 people said the same thing; it MUST be true!

[-] Urist@lemmy.ml 3 points 6 hours ago

I think the point is rather that it is distinguishable for someone knowledgeable on the subject, but not for someone is not. Thus making it harder to evolve from the latter to the former.

[-] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 82 points 1 day ago

This was honestly my biggest fear for a lot of FOSS applications.

Not necessarily in a malicious way (although there's certainly that happening as well). I think there's a lot of users who want to contribute, but don't know how to code, and suddenly think...hey...this is great! I can help out now!

Well meaning slop is still slop.

[-] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 65 points 1 day ago

Look. I have no problems if you want to use AI to make shit code for your own bullshit. Have at it.

Don't submit that shit to open Source projects.

You want to use it? Use it for your own shit. The rest of us didn't ask for this. I'm really hoping the AI bubble bursts in a big way very soon. Microsoft is going to need a bail out, openai is fucking doomed, and z/Twitter/grok could go either way honestly.

Who in their right fucking mind looks at the costs of running an AI datacenter, and the fact that it's more economically feasible to buy a fucking nuclear power plant to run it all, and then say, yea, this is reasonable.

The C-whatever-O's are all taking crazy pills.

[-] Hiro8811@lemmy.world 49 points 1 day ago

AI crowd trying hard to find uses for AI

[-] setsubyou@lemmy.world 32 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I think the open slop situation is also in part people who just want a feature and genuinely think they’re helping. People who can’t do the task themselves also can’t tell that the LLM also can’t do it.

But a lot of them are probably just padding their GitHub account too. Any given popular project has tons of forks by people who just want to have lots of repositories on their GitHub but don’t actually make changes because they can’t actually do it. I used to maintain my employer’s projects on GitHub and literally we’d have something like 3000 forks and 2990 of them would just be forks with no changes by people with lots of repositories but no actual work. Now these people are using LLMs to also make changes…

[-] Bongles@lemmy.zip 14 points 22 hours ago

I don't contribute to open source projects (not talented enough at the moment, I can do basic stuff for myself sometimes) but I wonder if you can implement some kind of requirement to prove that your code worked to avoid this issue.

Like, you're submitting a request that fixes X thing or adds Y feature, show us it doing it before we review it in full.

[-] Magnum@infosec.pub 11 points 17 hours ago

Tests, what you are asking for are automated tests.

[-] Bongles@lemmy.zip 1 points 15 hours ago

Can that be done on github?

[-] brotato@slrpnk.net 2 points 14 hours ago

Yep, take a look into GitHub actions. Basically you can make it so that a specific set of tests are run every time a PR is opened against your code repo. In the background it just spins up a container and runs any commands you define in a YAML config file.

[-] selfAwareCoder@programming.dev 13 points 19 hours ago

The trouble is just volume and time, even just reading through the description and "proof it works" would take a few minutes, and if you're getting 10s of these a day it can easily eat up time to find the ones worth reviewing. (and these volunteers are working in their free time after a normal work day, so wasting 15 or 30 minutes out of the volunteers one or two hours of work is throwing away a lot of time.

Plus, when volunteering is annoying the volunteers stop showing up which kills projects

[-] raynethackery@lemmy.world 83 points 1 day ago

This is big tech trying to kill FOSS.

[-] village604@adultswim.fan 9 points 19 hours ago

Which is funny because most of them rely on it

[-] Routhinator@lemmy.ca 52 points 1 day ago

Get that code off of slophub and move it to Codeberg.

[-] lepinkainen@lemmy.world 21 points 1 day ago

Is codeberg magically immune to AI slop pull requests?

[-] Routhinator@lemmy.ca 38 points 1 day ago

No but they are actively not promoting it or encouraging it. Github and MS are. If you're going to keep staying on the pro-AI site, you're going to eat the consequences of that. Github are actively encouraging these submissions with profile badges and other obnoxious crap. Its not an appropriate env for development anymore. Its gamified AI crap.

[-] woelkchen@lemmy.world 28 points 1 day ago

No (just like Lemmy isn't immune against AI comments) but Github is actively working towards AI slop

[-] SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 24 points 1 day ago

A similar problem is happening in submissions to science journals.

[-] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 49 points 1 day ago

Godot is also weighing the possibility of moving the project to another platform where there might be less incentive for users to "farm" legitimacy as a software developer with AI-generated code contributions.

Aahhh, I see the issue know.

That’s the incentive to just skirt the rules of whatever their submission policy is.

[-] e8d79@discuss.tchncs.de 101 points 1 day ago

I think moving off of GitHub to their own forge would be a good first step to reduce this spam.

[-] orize@lemmy.dbzer0.com 40 points 1 day ago
[-] e8d79@discuss.tchncs.de 43 points 1 day ago

Codeberg is cool but I would prefer not having all FOSS project centralised on another platform. In my opinion projects of the size of Godot should consider using their own infrastructure.

[-] Routhinator@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 day ago

Hosting a public code repo can be expensive, however they can run a private repo using Forgejo and mirror to Codeberg to create redundancy and have public code that doesn't eat so much monthy revenue, if they even have revenue.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Luden@lemmings.world 33 points 1 day ago

I am a game developer and a web developer and I use AI sometimes just to make it write template code for me so that I can make the boilerplate faster. For the rest of the code, AI is soooo dumb it's basically impossible to make something that works!

[-] rumba@lemmy.zip 16 points 1 day ago

The context windows are only so large. Once you give it too much to juggle, it starts doing crazy shit.

Boilerplates are fine, they can even usually stub out endpoints.

Also the cheap model access is often a lot less useful than the enterprise stuff. I have access to three different services through work and even inside GPT land there are vast differences in capability.

Claude Code has this REALLY useful implementation of agents. You can create agents with their own system prompts. Then the main context window becomes an orchestrator; you tell it what you're looking for and tell it to use the agents to do the work. The main window becomes a project manager with a mostly empty context window, it farms out the requests to the agents which each have their own context window. Each new task is individual, The orchestrator makes sure the agents get the job done, none of the workloads get so large that stuff goes insane.

It's still not like you can say, go make me this game then argue with it for a couple of hours and end up with good things. But if you keep the windows small, it can crap-out a decent function/module if you clarify you want to focus on security, best practice, and code reusability. They're also not bad at writing unit tests.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] MITM0@lemmy.world 51 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

So I guess it is time to switch to a different style of FOSS development ?

The cathedral style, which is utilized by Fossil, basically in order to contribute you'll have to be manually included into the group. It's a high-trust environment where devs know each other on a 1st-name basis.

Oh BTW, Fossil is a fully-fledged alternative to Git & Github. It has:

  • Version-Tracking
  • Webserver
  • Bug-tracker
  • Ticketting-system
  • Wiki
  • Forum
  • Chat
  • And a Graphical User-Interface which you can theme

All in One binary

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 18 Feb 2026
967 points (99.4% liked)

Technology

81451 readers
4279 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS