this post was submitted on 18 Oct 2026
104 points (100.0% liked)

Fuck AI

8526 readers
2108 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
VerbFlow@lemmy.world
MrMcGasion@lemmy.world
TootSweet@lemmy.world
BigMikeInAustin@lemmy.world
cynar@lemmy.world
drmeanfeel@lemmy.world
pavnilschanda@lemmy.world
CriticalMedicine@lemmy.world
WonderfulWanderer@lemmy.world
Communist@lemmy.ml
eatCasserole@lemmy.world
SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
NutWrench@lemmy.world
Soup@lemmy.cafe
iAvicenna@lemmy.world
Tinks@lemmy.world
wizblizz@lemmy.world
corus_kt@lemmy.world
Prandom_returns@lemm.ee
JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
TrickDacy@lemmy.world
TheFriar@lemm.ee
ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com
HawlSera@lemm.ee
andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works
MeDuViNoX@sh.itjust.works
33550336@lemmy.world
Nougat@fedia.io
Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
Quill7513@slrpnk.net
glowing_hans@sopuli.xyz
e8d79@discuss.tchncs.de
ThefuzzyFurryComrade@pawb.social
104
New authors listed on the Books, Authors & Writers category on noailist.org - the list of projects that do not use AI. (noailist.org)
submitted 4 days ago by stuartml@piefed.social to c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world
6 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Find your next fun read that wasn't made using AI! These authors have publicly stated they do not use AI in their writings.

top 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] RustyNova@lemmy.world -2 points 4 days ago (2 children)

I personally think their criteria for no AI is a bit too much. While I am 100% against slop code, if someone does a PR on my code that adds a constructor or a few getters, I wouldn't refuse it just because "it's tainted with AI."

Yes I would have preferred it if it wasn't. Yes I will give them a talking to. But I'm not going to refuse their PR either as a human would do the exact same thing as the LLM produced. It's just unproductive, wasted time and compute for no reason.

And with a fully against AI policy, that just makes people hide their usage of AI, making it even harder to find the slop code.

[–] jaschop@awful.systems 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Idk, given that we can't really conclusively prove that anything post-2022 is slop-free, don't you think setting a no-AI policy is still good for setting social expectations? And making people spend effort to conceal AI work is not a bad thing, since one problem with slop-PRs is that they are low-effort.

And I use tons of old projects that haven't made an anti-AI declaration (and have to use a bunch that are slop-permissive e.g. the kernel), but I still appreciate every one that does.

[–] RustyNova@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

I'm not against a policy. I'm just choosing a policy like "99.9% of slop will get rejected" policy .

Although I never really experienced bad low effort PRs. Either it was small changes with no other ways to do X, which I merged with a "please don't use AI in the future, it's bad blah blah blah"... or the entire project forked, updated to an unstable version, and full on slop that I reject

[–] jaschop@awful.systems 1 points 2 days ago

That seems totally reasonable too.

[–] jason@discuss.online 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I would most certainly give them a talking to for trying to add constructors, getters, and setters!

[–] RustyNova@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

I mostly write rust, and unless the struct represent data, I will make the fields private. And it happens I forget to make getters for it...

I would definitely use AI to create those... If it wasn't so ethically shitty... (would prefer a vscodium extension to also auto generate those)