this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2026
62 points (95.6% liked)

Selfhosted

60320 readers
513 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

Detailed Rules Post

  1. Be civil.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts are to be related to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

  7. Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

As a review, I want to highlight the constructive feedback:

  • Overwhelming majority support some kind of tagging to identify AI projects and discussions
  • A small portion have mentioned a preference for a "Not AI" tag, specifically for project promo posts to make it an active choice
  • Too many tags would make it too complicated
  • A tag for AI topics as well as a tag for AI projects would be helpful
  • A variation of [AI] is preferred by folks who commented on tag naming
  • A tag is not enough, how they used AI is important
  • A tagged post should not have drive-by comments that don't add to the conversation

For those who want "no AI ever", that isn't really possible. I'd recommend starting a new community, as so many critical pieces use AI in some capacity (linux, openssl, mariadb, curl, node, go, etc) that it would be a very different, hyper-specific community.


My recommendation based on what was said:

  • Three tags:
    • [CBH] - Code By Human - A promo post with a project that did not use AI in any capacity.
    • [AIP] - AI Project - A promo post with a project that used AI in development in any capacity. Disclosure is required for how it was used.
    • [AIT] - AI Topic - A discussion topic that includes AI. This is for items like "I want to customize a model to evaluate fish happiness based on CV captures" or "I'm having trouble configuring this MCP"

Posts that are not promotional and do not involve AI would not require a tag.

All promo posts would require a tag, making it an active decision to put [CBH] or [AIP], and would become kind of an extension of rule 7.

For [AIP], there would be a disclosure followup. I'm thinking something akin to the candor.md/ai-declaration.md approach, and this structure is based on that. The poster would need to identify which part of the process used AI:

  • Design - architecture, system design
  • Implementation - production code
  • Testing - writing tests, test plans, and QA.
  • Documentation - Docs, comments, readmes, changelogs
  • Review - Code review and pull request feedback
  • Deployment - CI/CD configuration.

And then the level (human only elements can be skipped):

  • Hint - AI suggested solution, human does the task.
  • Assisted - AI acts on part of a task, but a human handled the bulk.
  • Pair - About a 50/50 split of human made and generated.
  • Generated - a human prompted, the llm generated. (I see no substantial differentiation between Copilot and auto from ai-declaration.md for our use case, so I renamed to 'generated')

The requirement would be to call out only the parts which used AI, and the level of AI involvement for that process. So lets say there was an post tagged [AIP], and lets also assume there was a working automod to make this comment:


It looks like you've posted a project with the [AIP] tag.

Please reply to this comment with your AI Disclosure as described in the [AI RULES POST] (this will be a link), required for all [AIP] posts.

Identify which parts of the process involved AI (Design, Implementation, Testing, Documentation, Review, Deployment) and the level of AI involvement (hint, assist, pair, generated). See the [AI RULES POST] for details. Additional notes on use are welcomed if you'd like to provide them.


The [AI Rules Post] would contain the details above, just like the expanded rules post/explanations.

Failure to provide a disclosure after using the tag would mean removing the post. It could be locked, but I would have to assume the majority of the spam-type postings that happened to make it past the rule 7 criteria are the ones who will not provide the requested disclosure. I think it makes for a good filter this way, but please comment if you think otherwise.

In terms of timing, I'd say an hour should be more than enough time to provide a reply. If there isn't one, then the post should be reported so it could be removed. Removals, as always, will be by a person, so they will be at some point after the hour limit.

I'll likely make a crappy little bot in python to handle the tag check, check post_id to make sure it hasn't already replied (this way if it gets edited in it will still comment) specifically for the [AIP] tag only. It won't do a single thing otherwise. If you know of an existing (and good) bot for this, please share, or be subjected to the roughly 50 lines of code I wrote this morning. If I do use mine, I'll put it up on codeberg so everyone can see exactly what its doing.... and then get mad and tell me there is a better way.

Speaking of, I've made a repo for /c/selfhosted, currently with just the detailed rules post. I'll put other information there later, such as the AI rules post, the comment bot (if applicable), etc. This will also go into the sidebar once I've had time to update the README and other details.

Please respond with your questions, comments, and criticisms

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Shimitar@downonthestreet.eu 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Disclosure is needed, I agree.

Let's say it feels complex, and the tags will not avoid the discussion in the comments anyway .. but it's a start so good for it

[–] curbstickle@anarchist.nexus 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'd love an idea to trim it down... but with the wide varieties of ways AI can be used, its hard.

I'm a good example of the "problem" person in a way. I'll test all kinds of things (including a completely, 100% vibe coded app posted here recently.... in a sectioned off vlan of course), but what AI was used for influences where I look. Documentation? Ok, not the worst, but I'm going to check for human review/blatant llm goofs. You used it to figure out how to talk to a serial controlled endpoint? Ok, thats what needs to be checked first.

You made the whole ass thing with Claude? I'll test it like I said, but I doubt it would ever end up anywhere near my own production use, its more as a curiosity. 99/100 that level of generated is basically the same as calling it unmaintained imo.

So there is definite value to knowing where/how/how much, and if the comments consist of things already stated and just add "slop", thats going to get deleted, its already disclosed, the people who comment that should filter instead. Its a two way benefit this way as I see it.

That said - I'm always open to options here, but considering recent comments and reports since I've taken over moderating, something is definitely needed.

[–] reelworks@lemmy.world 1 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

@curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com Thanks for all that you are doing here. I want to come out and say this -even if thats not helping dicussion here. I apologize. I was part of the problem mentioned here.

I have taken down the repo, and the docker images. If I had said anything in the post that started 'I built' I take that back. Someone whse core value is not to dilute the truth - I missed something. Even my social post refined with AI (not a native english speaker) did credit AI. And AI usage policy, PR template with disclosure, was present in repo, took a lot of care, but I mentioned 'not another vibe coded arr project' the the README and then didn't say by how much. I presumed. To me vibe coding was completely different from what I did.

I don't want to give out my resume, or state what I did, why I did etc. I will need to say this: I like the policy laid out here and 100% make sense. I want to say I believe what you believe or even more so for a lot of reasons but then I also see various shades of grey there. It was not AI psychosis that led me to create an account and a repo like that. Also I didn't ask for donations or ever expected one. I am sure I don't have what it takes to maintain a linux kernel or something like curl, and not an experienced OSS maintainer. I am also not a sad AI driver without skills either. I came in without any repute, no hello nothing and dropped that recent one you likely talked about here. The product pitch wasn't clean, the wall of text there also did not point to an easy to understand single purpose tool - it was doing many things. Looking back, it would have been infuriating to folks in that channel. Apologize again, for whatever disruption I made in the arr community from where I have taken much. Servarr had every right to kick me out.. Thanks for the clarity. Grateful for the learning.

  • Not refined with AI.
[–] curbstickle@anarchist.nexus 1 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

None of this is specifically about you, FYI.

There have been a good number of posts, and there are some people very solidly anti AI anything, some who use it as a tool, and some who use it for everything. That combo meant we need rules about it - in addition to the rules about account age and f/loss exceptions and the like.

Edit: For the record, the 100% vibecoded app I tested was posted by someone else.