I stumbled upon a post that tells about a project not by the author, and the project has signs of AI. The post is clearly saying the project is good, so I interpreted it as a promotion, but maybe I am wrong. Should that kind of post still be marked as [AIP] ?
The post is https://lemmy.world/post/52316345
Just like the discussion last time on this - every user will not be able to be a forensic reviewer.
This is demonstrated clearly with how you misunderstood the role of the agents.md file in the other thread, that was for AI to be used with the app, not for the app development.
So if you’d like to propose this, and people would like this, you’re going to need to include how or its simply unworkable as a rule. And I don’t see any option for how this could be realistically implemented.
Edit: autocorrect messed with the first sentence, corrected.
Just like the discussion last time on this - every user will not be able to be a forensically review.
I didn’t see it ! Sorry about that.
Just like the discussion last time on this - every user will not be able to be a forensically review.
AGENTS.md in a repository are used to guide development. The very file talks about using typescript; you don’t need typescript to use the app do you ?
So if you’d like to propose this
I was just asking for a precision, but that’s because I didn’t check archives enough
And I don’t see any option for how this could be realistically implemented.
I see at least one: if the project doesn’t have a clear no-ai policy, then assume it is AIP. But that’s not my proposition at the moment.
AGENTS.md in a repository are used to guide development.
That is not entirely true.
It can be. Yes, it provides agents with contexts - rule centralization, commands, conventions - which may be useful for external tooling for a project that runs on code live like this. It isn’t exclusively used for project development, which makes its presence not an indicator.
I see at least one: if the project doesn’t have a clear no-ai policy, then assume it is AIP. But that’s not my proposition at the moment.
Also discussed in the meta thread about this, and what results is projects being called an AI project that are not projects developed with - or even designed to allow interaction with - AI.
Also a non-starter.
Edited to add: What needs to be avoided is nonsense like the recent debacle caused by people being unfamiliar with Akedemy, causing a series of nonsensical posts about KDE being “all in on AI”.
Misinformation is one of those things I will not compromise on.
I was just asking for a precision, but that’s because I didn’t check archives enough
There is precision in the detailed rules post.
If you want to see the prior meta discussions, you can look at my post history. I don’t often make standalone posts, so they are quick to find.
I wish it would because there’s no way to stop someone from creating an alt to promote their own projects and claim “they didn’t know it was AI” when they knew full well it was.
It’s kind of funny how much people have to lie just to use a stupid tool. either you’re proud of using it and will stand by your decision to use it, or you don’t use it at all and don’t need to worry about backlash.
IMO I think it would benefit both this community and those who want to use AI if there was a completely different community to post AI developed projects on.
they win because nobody will shit on their posts, and we win because nobody has to read slop.
I wish it would because there’s no way to stop someone from creating an alt to promote their own projects and claim “they didn’t know it was AI” when they knew full well it was.
They will have to wait 30 days every time. This hasn’t been an issue for any post so far.
How does one spot signs of AI in a project? Unless the author states it or the commit history is full of bot commits, I really struggle seeing it. Any suggestions?
My personal recommendation is going through https://slopscan.ava.pet/ . It’s a simple analyzer, surfaces files and commits. It’s of course not perfect.
Its pretty far from perfect actually, and will often result in both false negatives and false positives.
Not a viable solution.
yes. Stop recommending stuff you don’t know about. Could be scam or malware.
bingo.
if you don’t understand how it was built then you have no business promoting it.
If it promotes the project, it’s a promotion, and falls under the rules about AI.
