From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
I think they should just create a policy where unmaintained software gets removed? Or flagged where it's easy to filter out.
Most AI slop just gets abandoned, but a real developer who wants to maintain FOSS software long term with some AI assistance is quite a different thing.
An unforeseen consequence from AI Slop is that normal people can now create quite handy software for niche use cases, but the barrier to entry is so low that those people often abandon it quickly too. Rather than security risks, abandonedware is starting to become a bigger problem.
I don't know about other normal people, but I'm certainly actively maintaining my own vibecoded apps as long as it's affordable to do so. By that I mean they give me the niche functionality I want & new features are not added anymore, but if a pillow or pyqt update breaks my app, I may figure out how to fix it even on my own.
i feel like the coupons aren't working
the cat eating eagles are being printed faster
there should be a place for ai apps, that is separate from human built apps
I'd just put them in a different repo that can be toggled on and off by the user. If you don't want slop you toggle off the slop repo and go about your day.
We could call it SlopHub
sounds nice
That seems like a lot of work for something that can be done with a search filter.
By and large flathubs metadata has allowed for pretty transparent overviews. Stick the same filtering that safe and unsafe containers have and everyone retains a clear choice.
This suggests that it has to be disclosed to the reviewers, which is a good thing, but how will end users be made aware?
I only use 6 flatpaks (due them not being available in the arch official repo's) and I get them via a gui package manager. I'm assuming I am going to have to modify how I do this for any future installs, and check my existing ones, but then what about future releases/updates?
A 'no ai' swtich/toggle would be swell.
Probably the right decision given there's no way to truly tell what level of AI generation or effort within the project itself with AI has taken place.
I understand the willingness to ban low effort low quality one shot projects, but given most software nowadays incorporating some level of LLMs, I can't ever see a blanket ban working out anywhere.
that's like saying that because we can't all always 100% tell if someone is cheating at an online game we should forget about banning cheaters - you can prohibit a behavior you aren't always able to sus out and use a combination of detection heuristics and making that behavior unwelcome (i will say i believe the correct policy is to label projects which discernibly use llms rather than banning them)
"It's too op, I can't compete, nerf it"
🤦♂️
I don't have an issue with this. If it's AI you can usually tell, if you can't tell then even if it's AI it's not slop and it's fine to use.
i would strongly prefer a label to easily filter with as a first pass plus not all slop has an agents.md or claude.md but can still be riddled with bugs and security vulnerabilities
That goes for AI and human made software. You should only use security critical software that is trusted by the community.
It means you contain the generated code.