Selfhosted

Sounds like a good solution for me. I think most users dislike completely vibe coded apps, not ai supported apps. So maybe we should be more specific here.

For example: [Vibe-Coded]

This would also support new users finding the right tag.

Personally. I want an AI tag so I know to look more carefully.

I don't mind AI speeding up a skilled engineer.

But I do mind a crypto bro, turned AI bro, with little experience, too eagerly advertising their vibe coded app.

Its too exhausting to audit everything I may be interested in and the AI tag would help me to budget and optimize my time.

You know, after last week, I've landed on the position that this is an intractable debate. Both sides have valid points and neither side is willing to concede or meet in the middle. That's just people.

Ironically, I think both sides want he same thing - no bots, no slop.

To that end, for the proper functioning of this group, I think that the wisdom of having an AI tag (even though I personally think it's a blunt tool) is probably the only productive way forward. The pro and anti sides will not see eye to eye...but at least with [AI] tag, maybe the worst excesses of both may be mitigated.

Cynically, if we look at Reddit as a "what not to do" example...the only thing that stops Lemmy from becoming Reddit 2.0 is friction. The tag provides friction.

Anything that stops the real slop invasion (ala r/localllm et al) is a big plus. I'd like to think that almost all of the users here are savvy enough to tell slop from real, but at the end of the day, if every other post becomes slop, it gets exhausting to deal with.

Bot posts on Lemmy have been on the rise, as (presumably) people migrate from Reddit and bots follow.

If the new community rules + AI tags can mitigate both slop and the FuckAI crowd, I'm for trying it.

EDIT: I think the [AIT] proposed else where is better than straight [AI] tag.

+1

Home-AI oriented channels like Reddit's localllama are filled with self promotion garbage, and it will trickle here over time. I'm not even against self promo or heavy coding assistance, but 4 out of five times the linked repo is nonsense, or straight-up fraudulent. And being obviously vibe-coded is a common tell.

Good to get ahead of this.

Also, +1 on supressing driveby insults. If the post is tagged up front, there's no need. That bieng said, it should be okay for users to call out an obviously a grift, or a "nonsense repo" that's actually pure slop.

I don't have a problem with AI. I have a problem with vibe-coded apps released as a one-shot and then never maintained or supported. That's slop.

I also have a problem with the trace apps (lifttrace, nutritrace, etc.) because while they're entirely vibe-coded, they are actively developed, but they're posted here by a brand promotion account that doesn't otherwise contribute to the community. If there's any "x% self-ptomotion" threshold, they fail it, because it's 100% self-promotion.

I know I also reported another post as slop recently but I don't remember what it was.

Not a fan of a tag, since it's not transparent enough. Sounds like every minor use of AI would warrant a tag, which seems past the point.

The disclosure comment I feel works well. People that care about if/how AI was used can check it to get a proper impression of the scale of and workflow for AI usage, and those who don't care can ignore it.

I want a community where people can use AI to help build a tool and be able to post about it here. But unfortunately, I’m just not seeing that. The AI-generated apps seem to be coupled to a drive-by, AI generated post (and comment replies) all full of em dashes and the standard Claude slop language.

So, yes, mandate an AI tag. Hold posters to it and remove violators, because it seems to always be the same class of “contributors” that are cosplaying as software developers.

Not sure if your rule changes are touching this, but the worst offenders I don’t want to see here are:

• posting and commenting text written entirely by AI
• not open sourcing or giving any visibility into their code
• adopting a paid model

The people doing that remind me of the people who would approach me 20 years ago saying “hey I have an idea for an app I want you to build and I’ll give you 5% of my company. It’s like Facebook for dogs, but I need you to sign an NDA before I say any more”.

i want a community where AI is not tolerated at all. ai is a corporate grift and there's no room for it in a self built community founded on resistance of the tech status quo

I would still prefer an additional [Non-AI] tag. Even if people are arguing against it - it is not same omitting an [AI] tag and consciously saying "I never used and never will use AI". And the latter is the thing most users who want the AI-tag are looking for.

I really is like having the disclosure comment pinned for a more nuanced explanation of what, if any, AI went into a project or post. I think just a tag can't capture the levels of AI use.

I'm personally a never-genAI, but, unless we go No AI as a community, I don't think it makes sense to group all projects that touch AI for documentation with all that use it for testing with all that completely let the AI generate all their code, etc. And I don't think setting a threshold for which get tagged makes sense either. Basically, a tag is misleading no matter how it's implemented.

I think this should be a thing. At the same time, I would also want something similar for funding or platforming fascists, but that is unlikely to end up being done. I think a simple tag, the [AI] one would work, is the best current solution. I think extra detail in the post is a good thing to do, for example AI assisted documentation, AI assisted bug finding, AI assisted vibe coding. They are all different and have different effects on the product and community. If someone uses AI to find bugs in their own code I am all for it, that is a great use if it. If they use AI to write their login system I am not keen at all given the likelihood of intense security issues and the low likelihood that they will ever fix it.