AI-generated contributions are not accepted.

Pull requests, patches, documentation, translations, issues, or other contributions that are substantially generated by generative AI or large language models will not be accepted.

Contributors are expected to understand, author, and take responsibility for the work they submit. Tools such as linters, formatters, autocomplete, spellcheckers, and other non-generative development tools are unaffected by this policy.

https://github.com/pixelfed/pixelfed#ai-generated-contributions

https://github.com/joinloops/loops-server#ai-generated-contributions

We heard you! We are not accepting any AI or agentic code contributions, and will keep building Pixelfed by hand.

https://mastodon.social/@pixelfed/117350705262301318

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] copygirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 43 points 22 hours ago (3 children)

"How would they know if my contribution is actually compatible with their open source license? I could just contribute code from an incompatible license, or proprietary codebase, without telling anyone." This was supposedly an actual argument against FOSS licenses back in the days. Yeah, you can't be 100% sure, but: You made your intent clear. And that's honestly what most people care about. Then all you need to do is do some rudimentary checks for quality and maybe do a quick vibe-check (heh) on the person contributing.

[–] Cris_Citrus@piefed.zip 1 points 8 hours ago

Thats interesting history, thanks for explaining!

[–] lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 19 hours ago

Exactly. Even if it isn't immediately detectable, once it is you've run afoul of the rules twice, so you can get extra punished.

[–] Hiplobbe@lemmy.world 3 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Okey thank you. My question was an actual question, if there was like a "tell" or something! :D

[–] wholookshere@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

There's dozens.

Large commits, over documentation, and not being able to answer questions about the OR are good starts usually.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

Those aren't really tells for someone just doing "tweaks" like they said. Or someone using a little "AI" like google search. Etc.

Ofc there will be obvious cases but in general there's no way to detect how code has been generated - especially since there's no such thing as "AI" in the first place.

[–] wholookshere@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 16 hours ago

My honest answer?

If someone is putting in the effort to tailor their LLM to produce results like that, I'm actually fine with.

I have yet to see an LLM thats able to do that by default. The only way you get there is have a human so close in the loop, theyre still doing the thinking work, but just not the physical typing. At least as I've seen, and I have less of a problem there.

The shelved things I have there are environmental, political, human factors, and stolen IP. Those are still fundamental blockers to me being okay with AI. But from a technical output, I dont have a problem with that limit