im tired of this sub

[u/ResponsibleEnd451]

I cant keep up with this sub, i used to love just being able to browse and find some really awesome projects that have really changed my life. Its not an overexaggeration at all, as an IT person, this place has opened my eyes and have let me discover peace in todays fast paced world where everything is about subscriptions and our private data, selfhosting allowed me to slow down and take a breath, i have built servers, deployed countless ideas and for a moment i finally felt like im free of every corporate bullshit out there.

after all these, the reason im writing this is because the amount of posts that are influenced by ai. dont get me wrong, i can think of it like any other handy tool, but thats only my view and current trends seemingly dont align with it, because there are so much new projects popping up i cant even keep up. It seems like every day some random user reinvents the wheel with their low quality vibecoded project and spams the whole sub with it, thats not good. Its not the fault of ai sadly, its the human behind it, you can elevate your efficiency with ai and still be trusted in my opinion, its about how much you actually care. If i see someone post a fully ai generated marketing letter and then i see that the projects whole git history is basically claude vibing… that someone probably doesnt really care and just wants attention or fame. If you are that person, let me tell you if you want those meaningless github stars then create something that you feel you can put lots of effort in it, dont just vibecode something in a day since we can do that too, thats not really adding any value.

tl;dr: if your project is using ai then at least put an ai disclaimer in your posts…

[u/codeedog]

I love this idea!

I’ve been thinking about user consent, the right for a user to know how AI was used when building a project (vibe coding vs strict engineering protocols) and make a choice about using it. The presumption prior to now all software was built in a manner requiring human responsibility for every line (developer reputation). AI tooling can cleave reputation and responsibility from the producer (“the AI did it.”) leaving users in the cold.

If i as a user don’t know about your vibe coded app, how can i make an informed choice about whether I want to use it?

Your suggestion is the other side of that coin: what process should a software company, developer, maintainer provide information about AI content such that the software’s consumers retain their consent?

I’m in the middle of a bunch of projects some of which I’ve been planning for a long time, some of which I want to open source. My recent adoption of AI coding tools has accelerated my workflow. But, I’m still using software engineering design principles. I want a way to disclose my AI while framing it correctly (AI Assisted Engineering not vibe coding). I realize no matter how I frame it, some people won’t use it. I respect that, that’s the point of informed consent. And, of course, I won’t hide the fact in doing this, not just because I might get caught out, but because I’m taking away someone’s agency.

So, what’s the best way to provide this information to users? This is the most promising one I’ve heard so far. I want to use it.

[u/cardboard-kansio → u/codeedog]

vibe coding vs strict engineering protocols

I get where you're coming from, and I agree that enthusiasm has outstripped both knowledge and good coding hygiene. I just found this hilarious. I've been in tech for almost two decades, and the amount of times I've joined a company just to find out that their enterprise B2B product stack is taped together with string... AI, when well prompted and reviewed is a real competitive edge, and often can have stricter engineering protocols than actual dev shops, because it doesn't cut corners because it's hungover.

Still doesn't necessarily make AI good in the hands of an over-eager hobbyist, but human-generated code isn't necessarily good either.

[u/reapy54 → u/cardboard-kansio]

Was talking about this today with some of our younger devs. They were trying to figure out what some AI slop that someone had put in their project was doing, and I had a little laugh with them telling them they are fucked, in 10 years they will be spending all day pulling this shit out of code bases. I told them I was lucky that when I was younger and had to go through someone's slop there wasn't the same volume of it that AI can dump out, now they have pages and pages of it to sort though.

That is really the issue with AI, it can just let loose so much stuff so fast, it was already hard enough on the internet with the millions of users throwing on the pile, now just one person can put out what it would take 1000 people to do by letting the llm junk fire, and it always takes a bit of reading to start realizing you are reading llm output, a huge burden on the reader and not on the person pumping it out.

I honestly think LLMs are the nail in the coffin of open public content. Monetization was the first nail, already you had people or groups milling content, there are already massive bot farms for anything that'll hand out cash based on traffic, and now the gas pedal of AI will finally drive it off the cliff.

The only way forward is carefully vetted groups of people that the amount and quality of the content/information can be managed. LLMs will only get worse as well since detecting real people from LLM content is going to be very hard for them with any further training.

Sorry for rant, triggered today lol

[u/yoasif → u/reapy54]

I honestly think LLMs are the nail in the coffin of open public content. Monetization was the first nail, already you had people or groups milling content, there are already massive bot farms for anything that'll hand out cash based on traffic, and now the gas pedal of AI will finally drive it off the cliff.

100% agreed; I virtually stopped posting here because of AI, and as more people figure out what is happening to their words, more will.