I've recently had a request for tagging or adding a rule about tagging AI-generated and AI-assisted software.

Different communities have handled this differently, for example this decision after significant discussion by the selfhosted community.

What do you think? Would you like to see similar policy here? Something simpler that just shows whether something was produced primarily/significantly with AI, or something else entirely?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (8 children)

I'd personally strongly advocate for outright not allowing AI made apps to be posted, for these reasons:

  1. Simply using an AI that's run on a corporate data centers encourages the construction of yet more data centers, with all of the environmental/climate negatives they bring, as well as local harms they induce on the people living near them, such as increased electricity rates.

  2. Using corporate AI directly helps the financial situations of those giant corporations (by boosting usage/user numbers, they are able to attract more investment capital), most of which are ran by right-wing CEOs who are more than willing to collaborate with and fund fascist governments to ensure that they are not regulated in search of both maximum profits. Some of these companies, such as Nvidia, Palantir and Oracle, genuinely appear to be seeking to use these tools for what would previously be considered crackpot conspiracy theory levels of public control and surveillance.

  3. I'm wary of the potential effects of AI usage resulting in declining or stagnating critical thinking based on some preliminary studies (example 1, example 2).

  4. I do not think LLMs can be "just a tool" as many claim.

  5. 99% of LLMs (the ones virtually everyone use) are trained on copyrighted code that is incompatible with GPL licensed projects. LLMs have a 3 to 10% chance to unknowingly reproduce the copyrighted code perfectly, introducing legal plagiarism into an open-source project, which could easily open up the developers to being sued in the future if companies scanned open source repos for copyright violations.

  6. Many courts are ruling that LLM generated code cannot be copyrighted at all, meaning that it also cannot be legally made GPL, losing the protections from corporate exploration the GPL normally grants. https://fsfe.org/news/2026/news-20260825-01.html

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (7 children)
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (6 children)

    Quite right, thanks for pointing that out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    While we are at it... CEOs as well.

    Joking aside, saving your comment for future reference. Great thoughts here.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago* (4 children)

    While we are at it… CEOs as well.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    I only pointed it out because someone pointed out the LLMs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    No worries noc, I meant it in a playful way, thought it'd be funny since I missed that one too :p

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    I took it in a playful way.

    But your original comment put my feelings on ai into words. I sent it to my wife who is taking an ethics in science class, they are currently discussing when using ai is acceptable.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment