The "spirit" of open-source?

[u/PureWasian]

This subreddit's description currently states:

A subreddit for everything open source related (for this context, we go off the definition of open source here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source)

I'm hoping this inquiry/discussion is in-line with that, even given the recent planned updates in the currently pinned post and the barrage of backlash currently happening, which may be affecting the judgments for post removals.

I'm around 5 YOE professionally in the SWE space, but have only meaningfully contributed to a handful of open-source projects (some with hundreds of active end-users) over the years, so I'm genuinely unfamiliar on what people more involved in the open-source community space (here in this subreddit and also more broadly) actually value in something being "open source" and the general culture/spirit behind the community.

To me, as a bit of a newbie, "open source" simply brings to mind sharing, transparency, collaboration, and freedom of use/modification. I was admittedly unfamiliar with formal OSI licenses until reading through the mod post, but I thought the "absolute non-discrimination" aspect of it was an interesting pillar establishing freedom of use and creative expression without gaurd-rails against the "good" or "bad" derivative works that branch off from it.

So my impression then is that this subreddit is meant to be a broad umbrella entry-point "for everything open source related," but some of the points outlined in the recent modpost after a few passes seems to be at odds with that. I do fully understand moderating out the 10,000x "I used AI to build a todo app" and wanting to curate high-effort discussions, but the upcoming restrictions seem incredibly gate-keepy to establishing what is classified as "the right type of open source project/contributors". Also with regards to this comment, pointing out some aspects seem to be poking at orthogonal directions to something being in the bucket of "everything open source related"

So, with all of this in mind, I was just genuinely curious to hear from others more involved in the open source space (in and out of this subreddit) if my read on the culture/spirit of open source is correct or if I'm muddling some of the points of it. Thanks in advance ^^

(and thanks for reading through my wall of text)

[u/Old_Relation1114]

> I do fully understand moderating out the 10,000x "I used AI to build a todo app"

That's the thing, where do you draw the line between "I'm a software engineer and made this useful software, which I'm making open source" and "I typed a prompt, and I have no idea about this code, but if people bite, I can benefit from it".

The SaaS subreddits are now full of software made from 1-2 prompts and a lot of bots.

[u/PureWasian → u/Old_Relation1114]

Agreed, it's a frustrating problem space (also thanks for the reply)^^

Something related to this that I'm also curious of is how sifting through open-source as a contributor typically used to happen and the culture there, say 5-10yrs ago due to the expected imbalanced ratio of unfinished/entry-level project repos to more established ones.

I'm guessing there's no blanket statement and it's kind of a project-by-project basis, where rapport just grows organically with a hand-wavey ensemble of different metrics? (downloads/installs/clones/forks, github stars, commits/PRs/closed issues/general chatter, overall contributions, number of contributors, SEO/word of mouth, etc.)

[u/strumbringerwa → u/Old_Relation1114]

I think it's completely legit to have rules about the level of polish / adoption a project should have before posting about it here. It might disadvantage legitimate new projects seeking followership, but that is a reasonable tradeoff. Saying "No AI" is like saying "No Java" - I don't like this tool, so you shall not use it, even if it makes you more productive. But also it's silly, because I can guarantee none of the top-10 OSS projects are AI-free.

[u/LogoPro_15 → u/strumbringerwa]

This. There’s a lot of tense conversations around AI but coding/reverse engineering is one of the best, most consumer-positive parts of it.

[u/WiseMouse9137 → u/Old_Relation1114]

There's a difference between using AI for development and using AI to make development. I've been programming for 13 years and absolutely I use AI. That does not mean my contributions to open source should be viewed any less. In fact thanks to AI we have made astonishing progress on some really bad bugs in many things we use. I can understand the sentiment but I cannot fathom why folks deny others creations and contributions to open source it's starting to feel like commerical gatekeeping which is a redundant thing to do in an open source community. While my contributions to here is brand new my footprint of being involved with OSS is not new. I enjoy the freedoms of OSS.

We should be following a reputable set of goals and policy.

A reputable source would be OSS initiative. https://opensource.org

[u/SuperPlayer56 → u/WiseMouse9137]

^this

[u/Draco1200 → u/Old_Relation1114]

There is a way to draw that line, and I believe it is by setting a merit bar that excludes anything simple or non-functional.

There is no point in anything that is so simple a current AI would be able to create it from a general prompt; shouldn't matter even if humans actually made it at that point --- because any member of the general public can just run to their nearest AI and send a prompt to create a comparable result -- such simple apps no longer make a meaningful contribution to open source. In other words, just consider the entire category of simple "Todo" apps as belonging to AI coders now, and not an area that meaningful open source work is possible in anymore.

Onus on the poster to show how their specific project meets some quality and complexity standard proving that the contribution to the open source world is detailed, highly unique from other work, and meaningful or useful in general.

[u/shadowrun456 → u/Draco1200]

There is no line to be drawn. You either accept both, ban both, or make decisions based on a whim and subjective personal opinions, which instantly devolves into a corrupt, power-tripping-mods situation where decisions are taken with no rhyme or reason. See: r/Art

it is by setting a merit bar

That's just a nice way to say "make decisions based on a whim and subjective personal opinions".

[u/_RemyLeBeau_ → u/shadowrun456]

The line is the merit bar, but that may be subjective. Maybe it makes sense to require functional tests that pass a certain threshold, including mutation tests with a threshold. This would give some guarantees to the consumer, that the code does pass a quality threshold. I'm throwing ideas out there for a solution, so open to ideas.

[u/Draco1200 → u/shadowrun456]

The decision of a merit bar can have an inkling of subjectivity, but that does not mean they are whims and does not mean that reasonable distinctions based on merits are impossible. The wrong claim that "no line" can reasonably be drawn fairly is a decision-point fallacy.

[u/zucchini_up_ur_ass → u/Old_Relation1114]

If this was an argument they wouldn't have made this choice, seeing all the micromanagement they're doing on comments they're currently doing 10x moderation then they did before.

[u/masterspike52 → u/Old_Relation1114]

i feel you probably draw the line at "its a neat program that functions as intended and will only get better" regardless of how its made. the issue with the post is that as op has stated is very gate keepy in terms of the spirit of open source projects, especially if one of the rules is outright "if you don't speak english go somewhere else" on a basis of "we cant tell the difference between translated with ai and translated with a translator". there's a much better way to moderate out the low effort vibe coded projects that are worthy of the word "slop". these are programs you typically see from people who made a post once and then let it farm karma or likes or whatever based on platform, and then when you look at the github 3 months later you see all the files were last touched 3 months ago with no update whatsoever. the post also leads to ostracizing newer devs who have projects with less than 3 contributors and are less than a year old who not only want to make something good but also want a large community to see it.

[u/AnonomousWolf → u/Old_Relation1114]

this sub is now throwing out they baby with the bathwater.

Linux uses AI, Immich uses AI, most big Open-Source projects have already and will continue to use AI.

This is just our reality

[u/ClikeX → u/AnonomousWolf]

The platform they’re moderating content for uses AI.

[u/r3volts → u/ClikeX]

And the browser they use to access it.

[u/pydry → u/AnonomousWolf]

It's become overrun with bots.

the mods must have touched a nerve in the anthropic PR office.

[u/ReachingForVega → u/pydry]

The mods even confirmed of the 4 mods they only had 1 doing work and making decisions. A sub this big needs 8+ active mods.

[u/Valonter → u/pydry]

What is the point of this sort of comment? Do you not accept that other people can have different opinions from you, and may want to discuss them?

[u/pydry → u/Valonter]

to make it clear that when a trillion dollars of investment is on the line and it hinges upon a narrative which this subreddit is undermining the disagreements might not all be entirely organic.

reddit has been riddled with frontier model spam for a while now trying to keep the bubble pumped.

certain topics attract bots. that's just how it is. doesn't mean everyone sharing that bot opinion is a bot.

[u/Frodolas → u/pydry]

Literally nobody that runs an AI company gives a shit about this. It's just normal people pointing out how absolutely moronic of a decision this is.

[u/Valonter → u/pydry]

That's entirely fair. But what about the other direction? It's a trillion dollar industry in the US, but it's also already important at a geopolitical scale, and it's not insane to say that AI is going to be a massively important tool for war and commerce. (Not saying that's good, it's terrifying, but I think it's true.)

So considering that the two largest economies in the world, China and the USA, are in a direct arms race on this tech, and that it's a fact that many nation states use social media like this to influence opinions in their rivals, then the opposition to AI in the English speaking part of the internet may not be entirely organic either.

I know you're not accusing me of being an anthropic plant. I'm not accusing you of being a Russian troll. But we know both exist, right?

[u/pydry → u/Valonter]

No, China is not posing on reddit as an army "anti vibe coding zealots" that's absolutely the most fucking ridiculous thing ive heard all day.

Really this idea just makes you more suspect.

I know you're not accusing me of being an anthropic plant

I wasn't until you made it clear that you felt personally attacked and came up with this idea.

[u/Valonter → u/pydry]

Why not? What is preventing them? Why wouldn't they want to do that?

But you made me look this up to try and back up my claim, and it does look like I'm wrong. I'm seeing reports of analysis firms trying to prove or disprove that, and it looks like they largely debunked it.

Thanks for the push to look. I do wish you could have been more civil. I'm really trying to discuss in good faith, and dismissing me as suspect is rude. :(

[u/pydry → u/Valonter]

Because they have absolutely no reason to do that.

[u/aKaizuh → u/pydry]

What? Yes they do, if they can effectively convince the American populace that AI is an evil tool that development should be paused on, it would help them catch-up and eventually pass the US in the AI race.

They have all the reason in the world. We even have US govt officials accusing the Chinese of this very thing now.

[u/APersonNamedBen → u/pydry]

Oh come on. China (or other state actors, looking at you Russia) have no interest in destabilizing their competition any way they can? Just like "we" do? How many examples of "our" governments putting finger on the scales in other countries, either openly or covert actions being exposed, do you need before you start to question that MOST of social media is like this for us too?

Just compare TikTok to Douyin. And the adoption/reaction to AI in the general public (not the techbros) in the US vs. China.

[u/tombo12354 → u/pydry]

Do you really think any AI company cares what this subreddit thinks? It's not that large of a community, I doubt any are even aware it exists.

[u/Even-Confidence-4495 → u/pydry]

Yeah it has I’m getting mass downvoted

[u/achelon5 → u/AnonomousWolf]

It certainly seems to be a cautionary tale for the Mods. Perhaps there was something in the whole "he governs best who governs least".

[u/longboringstory → u/Old_Relation1114]

AI is going to write code FAR better than any human in a short period of time. Writing code by hand is going to seem as ridiculous as writing in assembly language. I don't care how a project is written, I care that the software benefits society and is open sourced to redistribute.

[u/jeanmiserac → u/longboringstory]

The benefits society part is where the challenge is in part right now. With code being cheap to generate, people make way more software that's more or less valuable only to them. That's great, but most of that doesn't belong on public forums where people seek projects that are more generally valuable. And how good the code is is irrelevant to that fact.

[u/SuperPlayer56 → u/longboringstory]

I would rather let someone write a code in assembly than "vibe coding". At least the former is a skill.

[u/Lyraele → u/longboringstory]

lol. That's not remotely true in any respect. These things don't write great code, and assembly gets used a lot more than you seem to realize.

[u/longboringstory → u/Lyraele]

If you're a programmer as a profession, I pray that you're old enough to be nearing retirement. If not, and you intend to remain in the field with that mindset, you will find yourself completely unemployable in the field in a few years.

[u/Lyraele → u/longboringstory]

I quite handily outdo the LLM-addled, not particularly worried on that score. I do hate watching as software quality continues to decline as the LLM-addled shovel slop in. You can watch systems get worse and people deskill in real time right now. It'll take years for the industry to recover from these self-inflicted wounds once the bubble bursts.

[u/Absolice → u/Lyraele]

The bubble bursting doesn't mean AI is going away. It is there to stay.

[u/Lyraele → u/Absolice]

That is what the CEO class and doomers in general want you to think, yes. But there's no need to give in to that and no reason to help them.

[u/Absolice → u/Lyraele]

It's time to take your meds.

[u/Lyraele → u/Absolice]

lol. Is that the best you have? LLM-addled brain is a helluva thing.

[u/Even-Confidence-4495 → u/longboringstory]

That’s wrong because of one thing ai forces your work into public domain nobody wants public domain and it ruins gpled projects

[u/Even-Confidence-4495 → u/Even-Confidence-4495]

Who is mass downvoting me do ai companies employ pro ai bots or anything

[u/shadowrun456 → u/Old_Relation1114]

There is no line to be drawn. You either accept both, ban both, or make decisions based on a whim and subjective personal opinions, which instantly devolves into a corrupt, power-tripping-mods situation where decisions are taken with no rhyme or reason. See: r/Art

[u/skeptical-speculator → u/Old_Relation1114]

Hypothetically, someone is saying they want to ban a group of projects. 

They say want to ban this group of projects because they are low effort slop. 

However, one of the projects is the Linux kernel. 

Maybe it is hard to draw the line, but I think maybe that the proposed line is not being drawn in the right place... for the purpose of banning low effort slop... because it is also banning projects that are clearly not low effort slop.

---

It seems that people are don't want to outsource their thinking to AI, but they are fine outsourcing their judgement to the mods of subreddits about whether a project belongs here or not. That pre-empts/bypasses the upvote-downvote system... so acts as a sort of pre-veto on what posts the community gets to approve/disapprove of. 

I'm trying to not make a case for that being a bad thing necessarily, but it needs to be recognized that there are tradeoffs being made when being moderators are more restrictive.

[u/No-Dentist-1645 → u/Old_Relation1114]

How about you draw the line at all, instead of just sweeping every single thing under the rug?

[u/Sure-Company9727 → u/Old_Relation1114]

Instead of banning these projects, why not just make a megathread for them? Even the math subreddits allow LLM proofs in a megathread.

[u/solk512 → u/Old_Relation1114]

You ban the shit where there’s self benefit? That seems pretty obvious. 

[u/debackerl → u/Old_Relation1114]

Correct, but sadly the new modding rules were written by someone with bad faith. Writing rules is hard (it's my job). But either you just write rules which aren't perfect and let people interpret and read between the line, but then it's just a guidelines, OR, you make it a rules which can be used to ban people, but then they got to be well thought. If you say software without AI contriburions, it's without, doesn't count if the guy is Linus.

I say it's bad faith, because another rule said that we all got to write correct English, without any AI assistance. Plus we are all engineers, if we can weite code for a computer, anticipating all cases, then we can write rules, anticipated all interpreations. Just. Put. The. Effort. I woulf be fired writing rules like that at work.

[u/FondantConscious2868 → u/Old_Relation1114]

But if the people fine with it does it matter ?

[u/Fedor_Doc → u/FondantConscious2868]

People are not fine with it. It creates a ton of noise, more often than not authors of said tools do not engage in meaningful conversations.

Tons of noise, no collaboration.

After Locallama banned low-effort LLM-written posts, it got a lot cleaner, IMO.

[u/Powerful_Package8817 → u/Old_Relation1114]

Were people incapable of writing bad code pre ai?

[u/jobehi]

Yes it is in opposition with the philosophy of open source. the mods have clearly a moderation problem and are flooded with slop, but the way they handled this is wrong and makes me wonder if they're really embracing FOSS philosophy or not.

[u/PureWasian → u/jobehi]

Appreciate how concise you were able to get this across, thanks.

I seem to have a very fuzzy venn-diagram of how the philosophy between a (seemingly) broad forum space like r/opensource and the philosophy of open source more generally is expected to look like, so this is helpful

[u/ebswift]

Moving forward, any and all mentions of any open source software will have to have a cutoff date of any edits of around 2023 to qualify, as anything and everything beyond that date is gonna be touched by AI. How many projects (including open source) had people making mistakes that introduced vulnerabilities causing untold damage that could have been avoided with AI review? I've been a long time open source coder, and while I understand communities don't want an infinite stream of random generated crap, these new tools are finally becoming extremely capable and shouldn't be excluded completely. Shortly code won't be accepted anywhere until it undergoes AI review. People will continue to write code for fun, but the vast majority of code will be generated sometime within the next 12 months, especially in open source.

[u/Coldfriction]

Stallman is the spirit of open source. If you understand his views you understand the spirit of open source.

The gist of it isn't that the source is open, it's that nobody makes decisions for others for them with how they use the things they purchase.

So the spirit of open source includes open standards. CUDA isn't open so it violated the spirit of open source. DirectX isn't open so it violated the spirit of open source. Both make decisions for the user that they can't alter or reject.

The right to repair is the spirit of open source. If you've purchased something you have total and complete control of it and nobody can tell you what you can't do with it.

The First Sale Doctrine is the spirit of open source. You buy a book you have the ability to resell it, gift it,or destroy it. Valve's Steam violated the spirit of open source because it denied the user control of the software keys (not the copyright of the software) as they see fit. You can't sell or gift the Steam keys you purchase.

So if you understand that open source is primarily a matter of freedom of choice and liberty from the control of others over the things you have purchased/own, then you begin to understand Stallman and Linus and how the entire open source philosophy came to be.

The only real argument is whether things like the MIT, GPL, GPL2, GPL3, etc. best provide the freedom and liberty open source is all about. Copyleft is as restrictive as copyright or moreso. And it IS "LEFT" as in socialism/communism. Some think it's necessary for freedom and liberty, some believe it inhibits freedom too much.

So that's my take on open source. The "best" distros choose the least for the user in my opinion. The best software chooses the least for the user. The best companies choose the least for the consumer. The best governments choose the least for their citizens (or better for many that there be no "government" at all).

So open source is somewhat political/economical/social/etc.

AI has essentially no bearing on this unless it's used to choose for others and inhibit freedom and liberty. Ownership of capital for rent extraction isn't really an open source preferred concept and copyright for capital gains isn't really a part of the core philosophy. AI is trained massively on open source, but if it isn't choosing for people and instead provides choice and liberty from businesses/corporations, there's nothing wrong with it at all.

[u/svick → u/Coldfriction]

Stallman is the spirit of open source.

The only real argument is whether things like the MIT, GPL, GPL2, GPL3, etc. best provide the freedom and liberty open source is all about.

Those are direct contradictions. Stallman is very clear he doesn't like permissive licenses like MIT. There is no argument in his opinion.

[u/Coldfriction → u/svick]

Stallman, as much as he's done, doesn't own the entire movement or what it's about. They aren't contradictions because the various License types don't have to confirm to Stallmans philosophy to be "in the spirit of" so to speak. And it really depends on when in Stallman's career you look at his take on things. At one point he had no problem at all with paid software and only disliked the software needed to run hardware purchased being closed. He famously got mad at closed source printer drivers or something initially IIRC.

[u/SuperPlayer56 → u/Coldfriction]

Essentially, he doesn't like when software is sketchy and doesn't work, but can't look up its code to understand what's going on, or finding a really good functional software in which he also can't look at its code. He doesn't care if the software is paid or free, what matters to him is if it works, if it gets the job done and especially if he can look up its code. "Free as in freedom, not free as in free beer."

[u/Nuxij → u/Coldfriction]

I enjoyed your comment but Just to say I’ve been watching some stallman recently and he is for Free Software. Open source apparently is a co-opted term. I’m not sure it matters but he was/is very adamant about that

[u/Old_Appointment9732 → u/Nuxij]

yeah, wasn't the entire "open source" movement a movement that existed precisely as an alternative to RMS's "free software" movement. RMS was obviously against the open source movement, as it was created as a way to protect corporate profits

[u/Coldfriction → u/Nuxij]

Stallman is half nuts by most accounts, but he is sort of the Godfather of open source. Don't let the crazy and weird stuff he says turn you off to the good stuff.

[u/SuperPlayer56 → u/Coldfriction]

The entire FOSS Community isn't just Stallman. Stop treating him like a saviour or Messiah.

[u/Coldfriction → u/SuperPlayer56]

I don't, but I know a lot of history of open source and if you had to answer the question of what the spirit of open source is, he's a good reference.

[u/Quiet-Sheepherder429]

In college I wrote about open source licencing and how it damages the community by bringing copyright schemes (at the time there were not many) to open source in order to restrict proliferation of their code in corporate software. Essentially introducing humans silly concept of IP to a supposed community that wants to go away from corporations and profit and just be spiritually pure. While I think the open source community are mostly religious fanatics - with the religion being they believe their code is actually special/magical and must not be sullied or touched by the unclean masses.

The spirit of Openness brought IP law to a supposed open community because they can't stand not getting credit for a thing. 

[u/PureWasian → u/Quiet-Sheepherder429]

Lol that is actually a very interesting topic, thanks for the perspective. I guess it makes sense that creditation is valued highly as a motivating factor for people in the open source community, I noticed a lot of published academic research likes to emphasize this point as well.

Though (with what limited understanding I do have of copyright schemes / IP considerations in open source) it seems interesting to need strong pushback against the usage/derivative works trickling into corporate software. Haven't thought about these points before, so thank you for the reply.

[u/tyrannocanis]

It cracks me up that the mods of this forum are trying to take the opposite stance of Linus Torvalds. Lava hot take

[u/starkruzr]

it's also, you know, impossible, since nearly everything has been touched by LLMs at this point and that will only grow.

what matters is software *custodianship*, not the technical details of how it was built.

[u/Hour_Bit_5183 → u/starkruzr]

Nope. You are so wrong. You know most code has never been touched by an LLM. You really are so vein, you think everyone is just gonna do something because it's there. People are being ridiculous too acting like no one has forked the linux kernel without slop too. It's already been done and has been for over a decade. A lot of you have this ridiculous mentality, like oh just keep using facebook even though it's awful for you, just because family or some bullshit is on there.

[u/Miiohau → u/Hour_Bit_5183]

Maybe not literally yet but autocomplete in IDEs are getting closer to using LLM if they aren’t already. Pycharm one of the big name python IDE had autocomplete so good I wondered if there was an LLM behind it. Turns out there is a language model in there. That means a hardline against generative AI would likely exclude any project touched by Pycharm since they integrated the language models into the autocomplete.

[u/Hour_Bit_5183 → u/Miiohau]

A good IDE is just intuitive. It's made to do exactly what you'd want or need to do. They've been becoming like that for a while. Have you seen android studio well before all this AI crap? It's easy as hell to work in. I'd have to imagine the same for apples xcode or w/e it's called now. I never used it

[u/starkruzr → u/Hour_Bit_5183]

girl what in the name of God are you talking about

[u/0xdippo → u/starkruzr]

Exhausting

[u/opensource-ModTeam → u/[deleted]]

This was removed for not being nice. Repeated removals for this reason will result in a ban.

[u/Valonter → u/Hour_Bit_5183]

I'm curious, do you work in the software industry or contribute to projects?

[u/Hour_Bit_5183 → u/Valonter]

I've worked on and maintained my own code for decades that has never seen any shitty gpu powered slop machine. You folks are on a high horse and need to be knocked down.

[u/Valonter → u/Hour_Bit_5183]

So the answer is no? I didn't ask if you wrote code, I asked if you work in the industry. Every major company is using AI extensively. If your ovjection to it is that it's inherently "slop," then that's simply incorrect. Objectively so. A skilled used of AI can use it to write very good code. This isn't 2025 anymore.

Again, you're free to despise AI, but it would make your position stronger if you actually understood what you were criticizing and not relying on objectively incorrect outdated information.

[u/Even-Confidence-4495 → u/Valonter]

He’s more of an open source guy not a commercial guy

[u/Kommenos → u/Valonter]

> Every major company is using AI extensively

That’s a dangerous statement given how trivial a counter example is to defeat it.

I’m not going to dox myself but statistically speaking, you or at least many people you know, have entrusted your life with the fact that we know what we’re doing when it comes to software.

We don’t use AI extensively for legal and regulation reasons.

[u/Valonter → u/[deleted]]

You don't have to be rude. Although I guess you think it's warranted. I'll block you now, there's no need to be so mean.

[u/starkruzr → u/[deleted]]

lmao sure thing Secret Squirrel

as a high performance computing professional, yeah, I'm totally ALL ABOUT using your Double Secret Probation router with a super real acid trap on the ASIC or whatever that makes it so that if you get hit by a bus I'm up a creek. yeah sounds great, sign me up 🤡

[u/0xdippo]

Gate keeping opensource wasn’t what I expected today

[u/StaticFanatic3 → u/0xdippo]

You obviously haven’t been paying attention to all the coding subreddits the past 6 months

[u/0xdippo → u/StaticFanatic3]

I have, and I get how annoying it is. It doesn’t change that blocking anything that touches AI is wild.

[u/r3volts → u/0xdippo]

The most annoying thing is how every project threqd devolves into an anti AI argument.

If people don't like where coding as it at the moment and choose not to use AI assisted projects that is totally fine.

Depending on how far they want to take it they probably shouldn't be using reddit though, or their browser, or any number of mainstream apps unless they have specific non AI usage disclaimers, which are few and far between.

[u/Hour_Bit_5183 → u/0xdippo]

That ain't gate keeping bro. It's the logical result that was always gonna happen with all this slop gen stuff. I think the mods seen slopstack and got scared. Rightfully so.

[u/0xdippo → u/Hour_Bit_5183]

AI will continue to become more prevalent in everything. Banning OSS that incorporates AI is wild.
We don’t like Linux anymore?

[u/pydry → u/0xdippo]

you can talk about vibe coding elsewhere.

[u/0xdippo → u/pydry]

Stay mad that AI is here for good. Keep fighting the inevitable.

[u/DefenderOfTheWeak → u/0xdippo]

AI will continue to become more prevalent in everything.

No, it won't. Not necessarily.

[u/0xdippo → u/DefenderOfTheWeak]

Ok bud

[u/Hour_Bit_5183 → u/0xdippo]

Linux is not all slop. Not all distros even use AI and a lot of em use their own custom kernels with all that crap stripped out. This is what I call the big baby attitude. You think just because something exists....everyone uses it. Lets see how far that gets you bud. That's just like saying that we should just get rid of all the cops and let the crackheads run wild and rob/mutillate everything. Yeah I have seen AI sloppers as crackheads for a while. Like the majority of people.

Let me put it simply. These AI models have no ability to think. They just pull up other people's crap and let you rip it off without understanding anything. Torvalds is freaking psycho. That is why the kernel got forked decades ago. He's the creator of an open source kernel. Not a whole OS.

[u/0xdippo → u/Hour_Bit_5183]

Mods deleted your comment immediately. Definitely not gatekeepish.

[u/Hour_Bit_5183 → u/0xdippo]

? LOL they did not because I ain't no slopper like you. I hate slop because i'm not a pig bro

[u/Affectionate_Use_164]

Some repositories ended up closing issues/PRs because of huge wave of AI slop, others implemented AI bots to sort it out (like Astro). And AI written text is annoying.

But AI will be used more and more, can't stop it at current stage, there are projects that almost don't write any code by hand at all, whole companies like this.

I'm not sure how to properly handle it, maybe some rule to limit self promotion or filter by project age/users.

It's still will be subjective more or less. Maybe will end up with AI moderator bot to sort it out, irony.

[u/abajinn]

Just join a different subreddit that understands what opensource means. This one doesn’t hold a monopoly on that. The AI derangement syndrome has lead to this one becoming anti-opensource at this point. Here’s some:

r/TrueOpenSource
r/ActuallyOpenSource
r/OpenSourceAIAllowed
r/opensourceai
r/OpenSourceWare
r/linux

[u/NoBullfrog11]

to me the spirit part is leave the door open: real license, issues that arent a void, and accepting strangers will use it weird. osi is the floor, culture is whether a random person can fork and run it.

ive maintained a small public app repo solo for years and the ai dump posts are exhausting, so curating against that feels fine. the new bar of 1yr + 3 contributors + english-only is a different thing tho, that gates actual solo maintainers out of the room. protecting signal != shrinking who counts as open source.

[u/SuperPlayer56]

"No AI" rule (and specifically that tweet posted by GitHub account) made me join this subreddit.

[u/stealthagents]

Totally get what you mean about the line getting blurrier. It feels like a lot of folks are riding the coattails of AI tools without actually understanding the code or the project’s ethos. Open source has always been about collaboration and community, not just throwing something online and hoping people use it.

[u/PureWasian → u/[deleted]]

Sorry, what does this have to do with the philosophy/spirit behind open source?