Very reasonable, in my opinion. PRs for features that will go unmaintained, have unexpected side effects due to AI not being capable of comprehending the entire codebase, or be able to guarantee their code isn’t ripped from a non-MIT licensed source, is a recipe for future disaster.
Better to put up reasonable barriers to entry so that committed community members can still get involved (who could possibly become the future maintainers of the project) while denying risky, low value contributions from statistical models trained on goodness knows what.
The reviewers can catch a bad non-AI programmer by simply looking at the pull request. AI-written code on the other hand usually looks fine and the cracks will only show when testing or building upon that code.
If a human were capable of crafting that much of a kernel module, they absolutely would know better than “if you are suspicious, you have to name yourself suspicious” logic on display. That lack of understanding usually precludes getting to an even vaguely coherent code for a kernel module.
Even as human slop manages to compile, it tends to be more obviously bad looking. The AI slop looks more like decent coding practice, just wrapping dumb concepts.
Finally, there’s the volume. Human slop takes someone fumbling a long time to deliver relatively little code. AI slop vomits up gigantic changes in moments. So with the door open to AI slop, you get overwhelmed with the volume of crap.
Very reasonable, in my opinion. PRs for features that will go unmaintained, have unexpected side effects due to AI not being capable of comprehending the entire codebase, or be able to guarantee their code isn’t ripped from a non-MIT licensed source, is a recipe for future disaster.
Better to put up reasonable barriers to entry so that committed community members can still get involved (who could possibly become the future maintainers of the project) while denying risky, low value contributions from statistical models trained on goodness knows what.
As if a human contributor isn’t like that.
The reviewers can catch a bad non-AI programmer by simply looking at the pull request. AI-written code on the other hand usually looks fine and the cracks will only show when testing or building upon that code.
The human contributing human-made code knows where they themself were trained.
The human “contributing” slop has no idea where it was trained.
It also helps that humand are capable of thought and have an understanding of contexts whereas statistical models are just guessing the next word.
A human also can copy-paste code from a non-MIT licensed source.
And you didn’t address, that a human too is not guaranteed to comprehend the entire codebase of the project.
And if the reviewer catches that shady and dishonest practice then they can reject the submission and blacklist the user.
Just like with AI submissions.
That’s my point.
AI slop is hardly worse than human slop.
Human slop is less likely to get off the ground.
For example: https://github.com/TuncorReUnion/TLAC-MODERN-LOCAL-ANTI-CHEAT-REUNIONED/blob/main/kernel/tlac_kernel.c
If a human were capable of crafting that much of a kernel module, they absolutely would know better than “if you are suspicious, you have to name yourself suspicious” logic on display. That lack of understanding usually precludes getting to an even vaguely coherent code for a kernel module.
Even as human slop manages to compile, it tends to be more obviously bad looking. The AI slop looks more like decent coding practice, just wrapping dumb concepts.
Finally, there’s the volume. Human slop takes someone fumbling a long time to deliver relatively little code. AI slop vomits up gigantic changes in moments. So with the door open to AI slop, you get overwhelmed with the volume of crap.
I hope you’re right.
No, AI is hardly worse than civil malpractice which is why it should always be against the rules to slop.
You forget there’s also honest civil incompetence
And that not every AI output is a slop.
I’m saying that as a person, who doesn’t like AI (LLM) and consider it almost dead end technology.
P.S. It’s quite petty of you to downvote me.
It’s 100% knowing and willfull malpractice to go to some source, steal code, and submit it as your own.
Also, I will downvote you every time, fuckin slopper. You lost all my respect instantaneously while advocating for slop.