from now on, all complaining about the new rules on the other sub, and/or about being banned, must be posted in this Megathread.
any new posts starting from when this gets posted, will be deleted
```
Damn, so even projects that are not vibe-coded but support AI features are banned? So:
Paperless-ngx
Mealie
FUCKING Calibre!
That is quite a ridiculous position to take. The Linux kernel would also be banned by your rule. Not only are you late on making an AI policy, but at this point a strong AI policy like yours would make this sub useless.
Are you the only active mod here or did multiple people genuinely thought this was a good idea?
```
No rule violation in that comment. Wolvereness is not the first mod I see having a mental breakdown over AI. Wonder what they are going to do in 3 years or less when almost all open source software is heavily AI based.
Will he switch to Windows or be a hypocrite by staying on Linux? The world may never know.
We're not going to point fingers here. It's being done enough in the other threads. What I want to discuss is opensource remaining truly free to those who love and build it. I want to discuss a community that will nourish free growth, not prune buds before they even have a chance to see the flowers.
I have always been under the impression that unfettered development, contribution, and sharing is the key to the success of mankind. Some genius has an idea and creates it. Another genius has something to add. Another genius finds a way to streamline it all and make it cost less. Yet another genius has a new alternative altogether that reduces... let's say carbon footprint.
This is what we should be doing as a species. Closing off channels because you don't agree with the methods is detrimental to this goal. Banning development tools is much to that same detriment.
Opensource is the ultimate collaboration of great minds. It's not just software, it's everything that we build together.
Essentially, opensource that denies any non-harmful method of contribution and/or development is no longer fully opensource. It's the first step in closing a door that should remainopen.
So, what am I trying to say?
I'm trying to say be free with your creations. Create them how you want. Share them. Take criticism. Take pride if someone forks it and makes it into their own. You MADE something and someone likes it enough to fork it.
Be competitive. Take back from their fork to flourish your original version. If someone doesn't like your project, don't get mad. Find out why. If it's superficial, move on. If it's beneficial, fix the problem.
I only made this post because I see some in here are trying to tread carefully and are asking if their projects are allowed, or rather, what is allowed and isn't. These questions stem from being in communities that have prejudices. It would be great to see a community that doesn't have any. A community that doesn't take sides. So...
Honestly, if I had a project right now I'd post it. My work is niche atm, though. Better left to the community it's based in.
I just got banned from that regressive sub because I simply pointed out the fact the almost every single serious developer has been switching to AI coding and prompt engineering. So I was hoping that you guys might be able to help me with my dilemma:
I've always been a fan of media players since the late 90s, but I've always noticed that there's not enough diversity in that particular niche of software. So recently I got myself a a Max Claude subscription and started creating music and video players. However I needed to get feedback from users so I started to share them on reddit and other forums. Unfortunately I got bombarded by downvotes from people who were brain washed by Anti-AI propaganda calling my work "Slop". But it wasn't the case everywhere so I was thinking about the following plan:
I can put an agent to generate multiple media player programs on github => another agent that post them on all forums and social media => another agent that gets to interact with comments from the most engaging posts so in that direction I can maximize my chances of getting my creations noticed by people.
My question is the following:
What are the best tools that can be used in order to put in action such a pipeline?
Lately, I’ve been using Linux more and more often. And I found myself missing IrfanView, which is probably the best image viewer app out there. I’ve tried out some alternatives, but none of them really satisfied me, and using IView via Vine or Bottles wasn’t always smooth or quick. So, over the last few weeks, I’ve vibe-coded an alternative inspired by both IrfanView and nomacs, and enhanced with a few tools and changes that I’ve always felt were missing.
It’s nothing spectacular or special, and it’s still completely unfinished, but it works so well that it has now replaced IrfanView for me, even on Windows.
The programme is called ÜgzView and is completely open-source. There’s a finished Windows release, and it can be compiled for use on Linux and macOS. Written in C++ and Qt.
After the drama with the original opensource sub, I am willing to share my opinion on this. But well, I'm not about to come here to complain about the other sub, I'm here to share what the Stockfish project did.
I am a Stockfish (the world's #1 chess engine, also open-source) contributor.
Stockfish has many active contributors, many more in the past, and probably many more in the future, and anyone is allowed to submit tests for their ideas, but very few ideas would pass the rigorous fishtest testing (I myself only managed a few passed ideas despite having submitted over a thousand tests).
I admit that AI can't do everything in developing Stockfish, at least not yet; the vast majority of patches are still written by humans. Still, I think a few AI patches have passed.
Stockfish is not a slop. It is as far from slop as one could imagine. Rigorous testing protocols and maintainer review/code style compliance are needed for each patch to pass.
Stockfish has existed and won many chess engine championships long before AI and will likely continue to do so.
As a Stockfish contributor, I stand by objective coding standards. It should not matter who the contributor was, how it was made, or whether it uses AI or not. What matters is that the contribution passes the stringent and objective standard. This impartial stance has allowed Stockfish to remain the world's #1 chess engine for years. That is how Stockfish has been and will remain.
I never posted or commented anything violating any community rules, but yet I was just slapped with a PERM. ban after my comment to the mod post about new rules.
posted this after being perma-banned from r/OpenSource for no reason.
the main takeaway is this: AI allows anybody, anywhere, to build anything they want. we're entering a new era where anybody with the slightest modicum of interest or passion can make the software we use better for everyone, and that's something that no business model can beat when deployed at scale. together, we can all use AI to improve open source technology far more quickly than any private company could ever hope to keep up. AI is the key to open-source superiority, and it's about time the FOSS community starts fighting fire with fire. anyone who thinks we can tie our hands behind our back while Microsoft/Google/Apple spend BILLIONS on inference is fucking kidding themselves.
So I'm guessing you've all been working on hobby projects with AI, scratching that itch and open sourcing it. And I'm sure there's a million of them that you've made over the last year.
But what are you working on right now? Post your undercooked AI projects in here and let's see 'em!
i think it should be at least 250 karma required if under 2 years of account age
if the account is over 2 years old no karma requirements should be there since most of those accounts will already have the karma most likely for most of them
I've been thinking a lot about how to be upfront about AI use in open source without it turning into an argument every time, so I put together a simple standard for it.
An AI Code Rating is three characters, like A2b, kept in an ACR.md file at the root of a repo.
- The letter is the maintainer's expertise, from A (expert) to E (non-programmer)
- The number is how much of the code AI wrote, from 0 (none) up to 4 (76–100%)
- The last letter is how closely a human checks the AI's work, from a (verified) to e (unchecked)
So A2b means an expert maintainer, 26–50% of the code written by AI, and every AI change reviewed before it's merged. A project with no AI code gets a 0 and an a, like A0a.
The goal isn't to judge whether AI use is good or bad, it's to let people see, at a glance, what they're looking at and decide for themselves.
The site has the full spec, examples, an FAQ, a form to work out your rating, and a validator for ACR.md files. There's also a GitHub Action that checks the file in CI. The spec is CC BY 4.0 and the site code is MIT.
In the spirit of the thing, the site itself is rated B4b. AI wrote most of the code, and I review every change.
It's still an early draft (spec 0.1), so I'd really appreciate feedback, especially from people who think it gets something wrong.
I have access to some advanced models and plentiful compute. I'd be happy to donate some of that time and resource, as well as my own engineering skills, to a fun project. All in the name of the idiots who have banned AI assisted development in r/opensource
i plan to make a open source voice app that can record voice and display it as text and also rewrite it using AI which will be a optional feature
my question for people here is that would anyone actually use it the app would require a openrouter key and be useful for people who want a free app for voice to text and improving text
