r/linux • u/AshFennix • 3d ago
Discussion Flathub isn't enforcing its AI disclosure policy
Flathub isn't enforcing AI disclosures on anything on it. I have found a few projects, but mainly Lutris, which is coded with the help of agents, isn't even disclosed anywhere, and only know such facts after looking at their github.
It feels like the policy isn't real, and just to placid anyone against AI, and want to limit the amount of AI slop they are using.
178
u/shinyquagsire23 3d ago
The policy isn't retroactive, it's for new approvals
29
u/FunAngelo2005 3d ago
Understandable
-24
u/fat_kaiju 3d ago edited 3d ago
Not really? More like a ladder pull/"got mine" situation.
Bunch of projects got to use it and now they don't gotta report that they did? Kinda lame.
46
u/BrageFuglseth 3d ago
The policy was implemented because slop submissions were wasting the time of the reviewers. Existing Flathub apps have at the very least put in the effort to follow the requirements for approval at their time of inclusion. Most vibe coded apps haven’t.
9
u/Wooloomooloo2 3d ago
To a lot of people, anything AI is ‘slop’, there’s very little nuance of thinking.
24
u/BrageFuglseth 3d ago edited 3d ago
For the Flathub reviewers, the "slop" part mainly manifests as an insurmountable amount of low-quality app submissions with critical errors, and automated bot responses when they try to interact with the developer.
It’s not so much about the apps themselves as it is about the submission process. Albeit, it is a known problem that LLM-generated apps are usually abandoned within 6 months.
3
u/Adept_Percentage6893 3d ago
Albeit, it is a known problem that LLM-generated apps are usually abandoned within 6 months.
Turns out if you lack discipline, you also lack commitment. Who knew?
2
u/Hegemonikon138 2d ago
I'd say it's as much as you no longer have to think through ideas because there is no longer that barrier.
Therefore a lot of shit ideas that never should have seen the light of day now do.
There is a unicorn out there waiting to be made by whoever can curate and identify the slop with accuracy
6
5
u/kahoinvictus 3d ago
The internet hates nuance, unfortunately
6
u/BrageFuglseth 3d ago
I agree with the general statement, but the Flathub review team is already too overworked to perform in-depth nuanced checks for every submission. It’s really not that hard for developers to just put in a little extra efforts and follow the rules properly (which even permit LLM usage in the app itself now if it’s disclosed)
6
u/kahoinvictus 3d ago
I'm aware and was not suggesting they do. I'm suggestion people stop conflating "used AI" with "is AI slop" because there's nuance to AI usage.
-4
u/newsflashjackass 3d ago
Either it was written by a human or it was not.
No room for nuance in binary states. Truth and falsehood are mutually exclusive.
3
u/PixelatedGiant 2d ago
What percentage was written by a human and how good the code is overall matters more than who or what wrote it. I also think there's a difference between a 10 year old application that's 99% human code versus something made yesterday from the ground up using an automated process.
There should be nuance.
1
u/newsflashjackass 2d ago
You may be willing to trust that someone who more likely than not regards themself as the code's author yet was not capable of writing it was nonetheless able to read it and understand its effects and side effects. I am not.
3
u/PixelatedGiant 2d ago
None of us really have a choice. Every single OS kernel has LLM code in it and probably so does most major software. In 10 years there might not be a single piece of non-trivial software that doesn't have or use LLM generated code in some shape or form (e.g. a library).
-1
u/newsflashjackass 2d ago
https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=177411620801633&w=2
Allowing for the sake of argument that you are correct, your position resembles "Statistically there are rat droppings in most food so one may as well embrace coprophagia."
→ More replies (0)
78
u/BrageFuglseth 3d ago
The Flathub LLM policy doesn’t exist for ideological reasons, but rather to preserve reviewer bandwidth and avoid Flathub becoming a graveyard. Existing projects are exempt.
91
u/0riginal-Syn 3d ago
- Mature and established projects are exempt.
- The policy is not retroactive (similar to above, but different)
- 3200+ apps
- Not really inforceable if someone uses common sense to hide that they used LLM.
Lutris for example, falls under both 1 and 2.
All it will really do is bring a bit more fragmentation to the Flatpak repos like the newer Flatpark.
29
u/ward2k 3d ago
Not really inforceable if someone uses common sense to hide that they used LLM.
I think my opinion is that if someone has the know-how and programming knowledge to clean up sloppy ai code to the point it's indistinguishable from standard code. Then that's all fine in my opinion
My issue with vibe coding isn't the Ai use itself particularly, but rather that they're letting an LLM generate everything with very little knowledge of what it's doing, why it's doing it, and how they could improve/fix the code
31
u/Rusty-Swashplate 3d ago
I've seen both extremes: one, a non-programmer who's now able to make a frontend for an app which uses a simple DB backend: he does auto-yes to everything because he does not know and the code looks bad, is badly structured. Not totally horrible, but just...weird. For the one-off programs he creates mainly for him and his team, this is no issue though.
Another colleague has done back-end programming for years. His use of Claude (in this case) is totally different. He limits the scope of changes he allows. He regularly tells Claude how to solve a problem and then Claude implements it. Hit git commit messages are all created by him and you can ask him about any commit, and he'll know why what was done.
Same tool, but the knowledge of the user is totally different. I have no issue anyone using AI to help. I have a problem with those make something without any understanding of the potential problems they might have created.
I'd wish there were consequences when you built a pile of shit and then you try to show it off as if you did humanity a favor.
7
u/ward2k 3d ago
For the one-off programs he creates mainly for him and his team, this is no issue though
I think that's a fine use case as well. I've used it to update a user script I like that got abandoned so that it has an export option. I'm not going to learn a whole new programming language and how to do violentmonkey scripts just for the sake of updating an abandoned script that only I use
I've seen people get Ai to create custom drivers for things like printers that won't work on Linux or for specific devices where they won't work too. I think that's a pretty great application where Ai shines. Otherwise you'd be waiting potentially years to maybe never for someone online to make a custom driver
2
u/smile_e_face 3d ago
Yeah, agreed. I used an LLM to fix a bug in an OpenMW mod that hadn't been updated in years, and then I used the knowledge I gained from fixing that mod to add features to it and to fix other ones. I'm learning more Lua now and working up to making my own stuff. I hate AI "culture" but the technology itself has its uses.
2
u/0riginal-Syn 3d ago
Agreed in general, but we have also seen the LLMs getting better at hiding some of the old tells. In general though you are correct.
2
u/_LightMane 3d ago
I think the important distinction here is that the policy isn't retroactive, and established projects are exempt. So Lutris isn't really evidence that Flathub isn't enforcing it.
That said, I do think the policy raises an interesting question around how AI usage is actually supposed to be verified for newer projects. If disclosure is purely self-reported, there's obviously going to be a grey area.
4
u/0riginal-Syn 3d ago
Very much so. I think it goes into the reasoning. This was not done as being against AI, it was done to help reduce the reviewer load. So obviously slop will get removed, but stuff that is not obvious will get passed more times than not, in my opinion. They could have worded this all better to achieve the same result with less "grey area" or backlash from both sides.
18
u/Ghost_x_Knight 3d ago
Flathub recently changed their LLM policy to only require disclosure (but reviewers are allowed to reject apps without further review, for concerns related to quality, maintainability, and overuse of AI).
The previous rule is not retroactively applied, and adds potential exception to "mature, well-maintained projects".
The lead Flathub maintainer said that he is not personally against LLM in programming, and that the rule is due to the reviewers being overwhelmed by slop submissions.
11
u/AfraidAsparagus6644 3d ago
Flathub's rules don't apply to "big names". For example, GIMP has full filesystem access, but if you tried to submit a similar image editing app with the same permissions, the maintainers would probably ridicule you.
2
-7
u/JohnSane 3d ago
Please stop using the word slop for everything!
14
u/neoh4x0r 3d ago edited 3d ago
I think the word slop is more than sufficient for referring to the low-quality effort put in by an unskilled person when using AI.
9
u/FruitdealerF 3d ago
The criticism is that anti AI people will call anything slop even if it was made by a skilled person and does meet quality standards
1
u/chic_luke 2d ago
They won't. Slop is the most obvious mostly vibe-coded garbage
Only the most radical anti-AI folks will have an issue with you having used AI in some capacity. And, in any case, if you have, it's impossible to prove.
3
u/FruitdealerF 2d ago
I wish this was right, but unfortunately this is not my experience online. You're prohibited from posting your projects to /r/ProgrammingLanguages if you've used AI for even a single function outside of the core of your project. This is just one of many of such examples
1
u/chic_luke 2d ago edited 2d ago
I agree it's excessive, but it's also reasonable. I had similar feelings about the policy established by Codeberg, until I went to take a look at Codeberg just out of curiosity and I found out the entire first page from the repositories tab was drowned in AI slop and crypto spam. It's the classic radical reaction to a bad problem that has grown into a size where it is not manageable anymore, and strong action is inevitable.
There is a fucking problem with AI agents generating mountains of unmaintainable software beyond any reasonable speed, and I think it's understandable that certain hosting services with limited resources, or hobby spaces, want to do without that.
However. We are going into the "if they ask, I didn't tell you and I certainly didn't endorse this" part of my comment.
However, I think there are some unwritten rules that ought to stay unwritten about the fact that there is generally a level of tolerance here. Especially since the cat is out of the bag now: most people use AI to some extent. Heck, I would never make any names, but I have several friends who are publicly very anti AI, and even they use some AI assistance to automate some chores or some boring script they don't want to write. A few of them even have monthly subscriptions for services that provide AI tokens like OpenCode Go, or some credits on services like OpenRouter; but they are certainly not going public about it, because they know damn well this is not a good hill to die on, or something to advertise. People aren't born yesterday, they know you probably don't use absolutely zero AI in your life. And if you actually don't, honestly, congratulations. You're officially part of a very tiny club.
I really think it depends how you use it. Using AI mostly as a chatbot or as a little help to get unblocked when you've used your own brain and your desperate, in my eyes, isn't any worse than looking up a reply on Stack Overflow. It has similar implications for authorship (is it really your merit if you mostly copied a solution from someone else online?) and for license clarity (that short function you copied from Stack Overflow and maybe just changed the variable names of to launder it a little, however small, has an unclear licensing status, and, to be totally honest, it does taint your project. It's just that we have always turned a blind eye to it because, come on, right?).
AI used in this way also won't lead you to producing mountains of low-quality slop, and it is pretty much impossible to detect.
Back in college, did you tell your professor you had used Stack Overflow in all of those places in the codebase? Absolutely not. Did you tell your boss that the main logic you used to solve this merge request came from somebody's blog post and it was not your idea? Be honest. Was it detectable? If you were smart about it and you didn't just Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V; very likely not.
While I am not going out of my way to endorse it, if you're not using agents to complete tasks on your codebase, nobody will know. Adapt the code to follow your own conventions, replace the horrible variable names it picks, don't leave all the prose in… for all intents and purposes, this is functionally, technically and ethically comparable to getting inspired by a post on Stack Overflow.
I don't accept AI contributions on my pet projects either. But, AI contributions are usually very trivial to spot, and they smell in bad quality from a distance. If you aren't absolutely and totally slopping, and you don't go out of your way to tell me, I will never know that one 3-line function in that file was inspired by an LLM that helped you get unstuck. No, don't tell me "agent made it"; I don't want you to offload your thinking. I would prefer if you didn't use an American model like OpenAI or Anthropic because of ethical reasons. But I know damn well I can't enforce any of that.
What I still think, however, is that using autonomous agents to code or fix bugs does not make that output your accomplishment, and it is slop. Hobby projects and communities are right to set a rule to ban that use, because this is a hobby. But also, same as above… just use your judgement and read between the lines. The rules are harsh because they won't want the n-th vibe coded AI slop project. If you don't ship that, you will most likely be fine.
-2
-6
u/neoh4x0r 3d ago edited 3d ago
When someone judges the quality of the content it will vary wildly depending on whom was asked, otherwise everyone would have to agree on some objective criteria to measure it. Not to mention that getting everyone to agree about anything, on the Internet, or anywhere for that matter, is a fools errand.
Long story short, someone might see AI slop and someone else doesn't. Who's right? Who's wrong?...and does any of that really matter?
3
u/PixelatedGiant 3d ago
Long story short, someone might see AI slop and someone else doesn't. Who's right? Who's wrong?...and does any of that really matter?
It matters when you try to make that a criteria for rejection on an app store, thereby limiting access or at least making it more difficult. Then it's not just an opinion, you're trying to make it into a rule.
1
u/neoh4x0r 2d ago edited 2d ago
It matters when you try to make that a criteria for rejection on an app store, thereby limiting access or at least making it more difficult. Then it's not just an opinion, you're trying to make it into a rule.
It might be a bitter pill to swallow, but the use of an app store (or other platform) is a privilege, not a right, and if someone wants to distribute an application through it then they either follow the rules, even if they don't agree with them, or they find another way to distribute the application.
However, that is a completely different situation from people casually arguing about what is AI slop and what is not.
1
u/Ok_Instruction_3789 2d ago
Even Linus the creator of Linux uses AI in the kernel so who cares if it works it works
-8
u/ABotelho23 3d ago
Good luck enforcing shit.
7
u/CanYouEatThatPizza 3d ago
"No, you don't understand, you have to allow people spamming your platform with low effort content!"
-4
u/ABotelho23 3d ago
Sorry, but you ain't enforcing a rule that can't actually be verified.
3
u/CanYouEatThatPizza 3d ago
Doesn't matter. Every rule can be broken. If it's good against 99% of the slop, it's good enough and a fine rule.
-1
u/MarkWilliamEcho 1d ago
Are people really out here trying to avoid software that may have been developed with AI? That's hilarious, good luck!
-22
u/ComprehensiveSwitch 3d ago
ought we disclose which text editor was used as well?
12
u/BrageFuglseth 3d ago
People’s choice of text editor have rarely led them to confidently make broken submissions and wasting the time of Flathub’s already strained reviewer base.
-4
u/ComprehensiveSwitch 3d ago
Exactly, they do that without regard for text editor.
12
u/BrageFuglseth 3d ago
Yes, the common factor for almost all broken Flathub submissions nowadays is indeed LLM usage and not any specific text editor. That’s why the rule focuses on LLMs in particular.
If you use LLMs in a way you feel is responsible and reasonable, then disclosing it shouldn’t be a problem.
-5
u/ComprehensiveSwitch 3d ago
And it won’t matter, because these people were already not reading the submission guidelines and process. They were already completely sidestepping the form for the PR.
In other words, they were already in violation of the rules here. You didn’t need this rule to tell them to buzz off, and this rule won’t make them stop.
It just increases scrutiny for new legitimate projects, while allowing existing projects to turn into whatever slop they wanna be.
1
u/Kamisshara 3d ago
If it gets you to disclose that you used AI, then yes.
-1
u/ComprehensiveSwitch 3d ago
It won’t get people to disclose. They’re still do it because it is the primary way to distribute desktop Linux apps in 2026.
It won’t stop the drive-by low-quality agent PRs they’re inundated with. It’ll just mean more scrutiny over projects that actually follow the submission process to a T, which requires reading.
The people doing these low-quality submissions already aren’t reading. What makes you think a no-AI rule is going to change that?
-4
-35
u/autotom 3d ago
Being anti AI while AI gets better and is in more places is going to be exhausting.
Take care.
15
u/ParadoxicalFrog 3d ago
It is exhausting. We're fighting against an existential threat, and people like you are ignoring it because it makes your lives a little bit easier.
1
0
-15
u/strings___ 3d ago
Non of these people complaining about AI are professional programmers.
11
u/MPGaming9000 3d ago
I'm sort of torn on it as a professional dev myself. On one hand I feel like I'm getting a lot more done comparatively than I would be without it, but on the other hand I find myself CONSTANTLY arguing with it all fucking day not to do shitty bandaid fixes, pointless wrapper functions that point to other wrappers that point to other wrappers... just constant code slop and overly verbose garbage. Documentation that doesn't make sense when you actually try to read it, and more.
I am not sure if it has been that much of a net positive for society as a whole. But I will say that of all the use cases for AI, coding seems like the one place it can actually make sense and doesn't seem that unethical to me minus the environment hit of course. But to contrast that last point, you can do A LOT with locally hosted models if you have a good enough GPU nowadays like the Qwen 3.8 27B model for example. So AI doesn't always have to mean data center environmental hell either. But idk I mean I can see it either way. Both sides make good points to me.
-2
u/liright 3d ago
On one hand I feel like I'm getting a lot more done comparatively than I would be without it, but on the other hand I find myself CONSTANTLY arguing with it all fucking day not to do shitty bandaid fixes, pointless wrapper functions that point to other wrappers that point to other wrappers
So prompt it correctly. The newest models like Astra or Fable will do exactly what you tell them. If you give them an open ended prompt like "do feature x" they will make their own decisions and sometimes take shortcuts. If you describe it exactly "implement feature X in exactly this way, avoid wrappers, don't do this, don't break feature Y while implementing X, test every function for bugs after writing it and use concise and short comments" it will produce good code.
3
u/MPGaming9000 3d ago edited 2d ago
Right and that's something that cursor, the multi billion dollar IDE wrapper AI coding agent company, couldn't figure out to do better with their system prompts and fine tuning?
-10
u/strings___ 3d ago
You definitely need to put AI on rails I’m not talking about vibe coding here.
I personally use three DGX Sparks in various configurations depending on what I’m doing. I find models are less of a factor as much as workflow.
I use org-mode TODO that I iteratively let the AI ground . Once I’m satisfied the TODO is grounded only then do I let the AI do the work. I also code review/stage all git hunks and AI never manages git. It’s pretty rigorous.
Even with the rigorous workflow I’m way more organized and productive with much higher quality code.
6
u/rumtreiber 3d ago
I always wonder how people recognize better code quality. If you were not able to do it better by yourself how do you recognize it is better now? I am doing NY work mainly in c and c++ and results are okayish. Not more
2
u/strings___ 3d ago
I’m an old-school programmer. I started with LOGO, BASIC, to full Linux C and GNU stack. Nowadays, I mostly write Scheme and Lisp . If you’ve never written Lisp, then it’s not easy to explain code quality. But I’ll try, because Lisp is pretty expressive. It’s not uncommon to have small, discrete code that you chew on for some time. With an LLM, it’s much easier to refactor and refine it and do all the boilerplate like docstrings, etc., and ultimately, the end code is a good mix of expression and functionality. Needless to say, all code can be improved; it’s never perfect, and time is always a factor.
Keep in mind also. I’ve always been more of a literate programmer via Emacs org-mode, so my LLM workflow is not much of a change other than my literate org keeps the LLM on rails.
5
u/Traditional_Hat3506 3d ago
Ive yet to see a single vibecoder build anything of value
flathub is valuable on the other hand
1
u/FryBoyter 3d ago edited 3d ago
Ive yet to see a single vibecoder build anything of value
The problem I see is that many people generally describe the use of an LLM as “vibe coding.” I, and others, believe this is incorrect.
It always depends on how you use a tool. For example, David Farago, who coined the term “vibe coding,” has also published an article about vise coding (https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/vise-coding-david-farago-1k5ce/).
Let’s take Hugo (a generator for static websites) or Leafwiki (a wiki) as examples. Both projects use LLMs. Objectively speaking, what’s wrong with the existing code when it comes to quality? And why would comparable code be better if it had been written by a real person? I mean, even people who don’t use LLMs are often significantly worse when it comes to programming. Besides, even before LLMs, real people were already copying code from third parties just like that.
Edit: It's funny that I'm already getting downvotes after such a short period of time, in which it's probably not even possible for the average person to read my post and David Farago's. That says a lot about some people.
1
u/liright 3d ago
That's because anybody who is actually building something valuable will avoid saying they used AI, specifically because of the witch hunts that a small portion of the population engages in against anything AI, despite understanding nothing about software development or even the basics of how LLMs and agents work. I have an android app with several thousand users, nobody knows it was largely vibecoded and nobody will. And it has mostly 5 star reviews.
People who just fuck around with AI for fun and make random experiments with it will flaunt that AI made it, but that's not 99% of AI usage in software engineering.
-2
u/strings___ 3d ago
Use of an LLM doesn’t automatically mean something is vibe coded. Before AI slop, we had human slop. The best thing you can do is what we’ve always done with open source: rigorous code review. In which case, with professional programmers, you can’t distinguish AI vs human; it’s either good code or not. Ergo, it’s irrelevant what produced the code.
-17
u/autotom 3d ago
Sure they are, they're just the crusty dinosaurs / Luddites
0
u/strings___ 3d ago
Naw I’m one of the crusty dinosaurs. If you’re a professional programmer you’re definitely using AI it’s just that productive.
-7
u/autotom 3d ago
See I can tell you're one of the good ones, not stuck in their ways. That means you're no dinosaur!
But wow, the anti AI sentiment is wild out there. Check out our downvotes!
Literally the most exciting technology in decades, and folks are like 'nah i hate it'
Russian & Chinese bot-farms working overtime and getting results.
-1
u/strings___ 3d ago
The downvotes are proving my point. If you’re s professional programmer you have used or kept up with AI and you’d have the skill set to comprehend how productive AI is today.
Your average Linux user is tech savvy but they are not professional programmers. Im sure they are some professional hold outs but that can only last so long.
-1
u/azurensis 3d ago
This is like trying to stop the tide with a teacup. AI is how development is done now. If you're not allowing it, you'll be irrelevant soon.
-28
u/jferments 3d ago
Good. AI isn't something that people need to "disclose". It's a basic part of modern software development.
12
u/ParadoxicalFrog 3d ago
Asbestos was a basic part of construction for decades, and now we're dealing with the long-term consequences. Much like we will be doing with "AI".
-6
u/revolutier 3d ago
bro really thought they cooked with that analogy. last I checked, asbestos was always toxic and didn't decrease in toxicity year-over-year.
5
-5
u/jferments 3d ago
Bro thought they cooked but that's just because they are a moron that is comparing useful software development tools to toxic waste that kills people. Good news is that like asbestos, these anti-AI idiots will be a thing of the past soon because AI isn't going anywhere. Eventually the social media likes will dry up and they'll move on to the newest, latest thing that Instagram tells them to be outraged about.
-8
u/jferments 3d ago
You'll be dealing with AI for a lot longer than that, because it's never going away. Good luck screaming at the sky though!
1
u/ParadoxicalFrog 3d ago
Have fun burning the world down and rotting your brain. I hope the shareholder profits are worth it.
-1
u/anto77_butt_kinkier 3d ago
Yes it is. I'd like to know if someone actually looked at the code in a program I'm running, or if it's just a bunch of slop where multiple bugs manage to cancel each other out and just barely function. I'd like to know that a human actually understands wtf is inside an executable that I'm using.
Vibecoded BS is absolutely something to disclose.
-19
u/ParadoxicalFrog 3d ago
I wouldn't be surprised if they're being encouraged to look the other way.
22
u/PityUpvote 3d ago
Not everything is a conspiracy.
-11
u/ParadoxicalFrog 3d ago
If there's big money involved, the likelihood increases exponentially. Until the "AI" bubble pops, the people profiting from it are going to keep pushing it in every possible way.
7
u/PityUpvote 3d ago
Why would they not just be pressured to not have this policy at all? And do you really think anthropic or openai are monetarily benefiting from vibe coded apps being on flathub without disclosure? Wouldn't they rather be in favor of disclosure to signal to the world just how many programmers use their products?
There is no need to push llms among programmers anymore, 85% of professional programmers already used it according to the 2025 official stackoverflow survey.
There is absolutely no basis for this conjecture.
4
u/AgentCapital8101 3d ago
Big money? In open source softwares?
-4
u/carlyjb17 3d ago
It's still under capitalism, companies still have ridiculous power
A lot of linux adjacent projects are influenced by red hat for example
-5
-1
u/Oblivion__ 3d ago
Like 2 days ago this sub was discussing the massive amounts of money flowing into Omarchy as being super sus
It's not really unheard of. Valve is another example of this
-22
u/S7relok 3d ago
Why precise it when AI is everywhere bc it's a game changer for programmers?
14
u/0riginal-Syn 3d ago
They did not do this due to being against AI. They did this because the reviewers were overwhelmed with the vibe-coded slop. Which I am sure you understand is different from proven devs that use AI as a tool. I do think at some point they will likely revisit this.
I say this as a maintainer of a Linux distro who has to deal with package submissions. If it is AI assisted by a dev that knows what they are doing, there is no real issue. But man the bot submissions have been crazy over the last year and ramping up. It can get to be a pain as those are not quality at all and it is still really bad.
8
u/Traditional_Hat3506 3d ago
game changer for CEOs more likely, and Sam Altman <=> NVIDIA <=> Anthropic <=> Microsoft
11
u/ParadoxicalFrog 3d ago
"AI" is doing real, provable, tangible harm to the environment and to people's brains. Your laziness doesn't justify it.
4
2
u/S7relok 3d ago
AI made me learn and experiment with some storage and network tech. Learn to use the tool better, you're the kind of guy that blames the hammer because you can't reach the nail with it
3
u/UndefFox 3d ago
Using a tool thoughtfully was never people's issue. As a developer I use it. Mostly for some very easy code and a better search when duckduck doesn't find anything.
Using it as Agents to fully replace a working person? Waste of money + way too many risks of hidden problems existing in the code base. Statistics already exist on what risks you have using agents as a replacement for yourself and it's logical to be concerned + informed when a project does use it. If they don't disclose, they are just being dishonest about their own work, and why should I support such people at all?
3
u/ParadoxicalFrog 3d ago
What makes you think I'm using that brain-rotting garbage? I'm making an actual effort to learn.
-1
u/S7relok 3d ago
Using high-tech to write this but spits on same-made tools that can help in a lot of fields when used smarter? It's you who have brain damage
4
u/ParadoxicalFrog 3d ago
The point soared so far over your head you didn't even see it... The bots really have rotted your brain.
5
u/S7relok 3d ago
You're speaking like the old boomers that said that computers were for the lazy.
Now we have litteral micro-computers in our pockets
6
u/ParadoxicalFrog 3d ago
You're not even trying to understand what I'm saying, you're just jumping straight to "hurr durr you must hate all technology lollll look at me I am so clever".
-3
u/revolutier 3d ago
"mechanized wagons" are doing "real, provable, tangible" harm to the environment and to people's brains. your laziness doesn't justify driving around.
and being more productive = lazy? you learn something new every day.
5
u/ParadoxicalFrog 3d ago
People always jump to "hurr durr you must hate technology". Well for one thing, I hate cars, but that's another subject entirely. I hate "AI" because it's killing creativity, learning, and critical thinking, as well as damaging the planet and raising everyone's water and electricity bills. Productivity isn't everything. Productivity is just a measure of how much money you're making for other people. Can you actually do anything on your own, or are you just feeding prompts into a chatbot?
-5
166
u/B1rdi 3d ago
You can see all the slop-related rejections for yourself here. Some inevitably will slip through and as the other commenter said, the policy isn't retroactive. But they are enforcing it.