Move Godot to codeberg. Github is too popular. It's where all the fool kids go and link their LinkedIn to. It's Microslop all the way down. It's highly likely the number of real contributors will be higher on Codeberg than Github.
Also, doesn't github have a viebcoding platform built into it making it really easy to create AI slop?
Edit: yep they do! Get the fuck off of github!
I honestly do not understand why anyone would ever for any reason submit AI-generated code to any FOSS project.
What's the motivation behind that kind of behavior? What do people get out of it?
They should close PRs to the public and only accept then from contributors who apply to be vetted.
It sucks, but that's really the only good way to prevent spam.
Seems like a natural next step is some kinda reputation system for a project's contributors. If you've written 50 successfully merged PRs, you're certainly less likely to make trash in any method. Create a mentorship heirarchy. It sounds very helpful no matter what. Then the people who have merged 0 PRs to the project will likely work harder too, since they know they will be at the most scrutiny
This is how they kill open source.
I wonder if the influx of slop contributions can be stemmed by a legal document that makes the contributor legally liable for their submission.
Seems like lawyers have been learning the hard way to be accountable for their slop, perhaps these lessons can be leveraged in the open source community.
Mitchell Hashimoto is trying to build a reputation system to combat this https://github.com/mitchellh/vouch
vibeCoding--
if the bubble ever collapses maybe AI use will cost too much to harass FOSS projects with it.
Anyone else suspect commercial game engine are doing this to attack their FOSS (free open source software) competitor?
Unlike other engines Godot asks nothing of its users. No money, no tie in to their sales platform. It's literally just good free software anyone is invited to try.
Sad to see it dealing with this. FOSS may be under a kind of intentional AI attack.
Really awful website with more ads and shit than content.
Nevertheless worrysome and indeed food for tough. Ai is here to stay, so we all need to find ways to deal with it, that we like it or not.
Maybe specialized humans in detect ai slop? Because using ai to detect ai seems kind of hironic.
I'm thinking we are going to have to come up with a way to vet contributors before allowing them to contribute code. This will likely reduce the overall contributions of people given we're creating a barrier to entry, but so many of these FOSS projects are just straight getting overwhelmed with this shit. Something needs to change.
Can anyone describe the process of code contribution with open-source. It's it like anyone hands in a code.
Can they require that all code submissions have a natural language summary of it included?
May? They definitely don't. Vibe coders are producing lots of garbage code they can't possibly have reviewed, at breakneck speed.
Fuuuuck…
Butlerian Jihad When?
Sad state of afairs. Many awesome projects will get tainted into history.
We combat this with, funny enough, AI code review.
Much MUCH stricter structural, consistency, quality, and discovery standards on code through rules and docs. Well defined expectations, stricter testing standards...etc Then let some agents loose on PR review and they catch all sorts of problems. Especially with other AI slop.
Coincidentally, the process of doing all this actually reduces the sloppiness of the slop that we receive, as the AI tools writing this code consume these rules before generating code.
Seems like part of the problem is that once they identify AI being involved in a contribution, they're not rejecting it immediately.
So it is a malicious attack?
top 45 comments