Selfhosted

A mandatory [AI] tag? Sure.

A [NOT AI] tag? No, that's the default. Why normalise AI bullshit even further?

I think [AI] tags would be good. That way a certain subset of members could just drive-by downvote without getting themselves dirty. [NOT AI] seems redudant since we've already defined [AI], but again for quick filtering purposes, I see no harm in both.

I would support those tags. Does Lemmy support some equivalent of post flairs that can be filtered?

Just ban AI already

Yes please.

If you see this seal:

You know the project is golden. It uses a no-ai policy specifically.

https://sciactive.com/human-contribution-policy/

We should be pushing projects to adopt this policy (or similar) to have a very clear indicator when something is not slop.

yes.

always yes.

I absolutely don't want Meta Tags in every titles. It makes reading the list of posts super annoying.

I also don't feel the need to know whether there's some AI commits, but I do want to know if a project is largely vibe coded. I don't have an objective metric on where this line could be drawn.

I think the status quo is kinda fine. Some commenter will point it out and will get enough upvotes to be visible on first glance. It's not perfect but good enough for me.

Yes, please. I don't like seeing a "neat handy application" only to find that 95% of it was coded by Claude, the fact of which is either buried, or not even mentioned until you visit the repo and see that it's the top contributor.

I know nothing about running a Lemmy instance, so I thought I'd ask. Does the Lemmy framework allow something like this:

spoiler

If so, maybe that'd be less annoying to some. The screenshot is from selfh.st.

I feel like this could lead to discrimination and prejudice against ai users. It should have been implemented years ago.

I think that unless you have some way to enforce accuracy, it's meaningless and AFAIK automatic detection tools are no better than chance and to my knowledge, getting worse.

An AI bot operator isn't going to tag their material as [AI], more likely than not they'd attempt to use [NOT AI].

I'd also point out that while lemmy doesn't (yet) support hashtags, any "tagging" would probably benefit from using the existing method using a #tag.

Ultimately, you need to ask yourself, is undeclared AI that goes undetected by the community a problem, or the new "normal"?

I'll note that I'm not a proponent of Assumed Intelligence and think that when the bubble bursts we're going to be in a world of hurt, but with a little luck the billionaires will have lost their shirts in the process.

Yes. Anything made, posted, modified, or output by AI should be tagged as such, always, without exception.

See, the problem with this is there’s no objective standard for validating whether somebody is telling the truth or not. So we can impose conventions that say you must tag something as being generated in a certain way, but that doesn’t mean that people are going to actually be forthcoming with the community.

This is a problem that we’re going to have to deal with not just when we’re talking about our self hosted builds, but almost anything that is mediated through a screen. So, if we can figure it out for here, I’d suggest that we tell everybody shortly thereafter; about it because it‘ll solve a lot of problems, in a lot of different places.

Bonus points if whatever we come up with can actually be self hosted.

Good/bad content is the same whether it’s AI or not, plus those using AI would probably just lie and say it’s not AI.

I'm in favor of heavy AI users adding an [AI] tag to their posts. I don't think we have to worry too much about AI users trying to pass their work as organic. Almost all AI users I know proudly and annoying shout about how great the AI is. So I think only a minority of AI users would try to hide their AI usage.

I think we should encourage users to add [AI], but also make it voluntary. We need people to complain in the post when someone doesn't add the [AI] tag, but they should have. I'm guessing here, but I think the more people complain about the missing [AI] tag, the more likely the project used more AI. I'm guessing if the AI usage is low, like 1 or 2 commits out of 1000, then not as many people would complain.

What would these tags indicate?

/r/selfhosted has an automod comment that creates a place to disclose how genAI/LLMs were used in the project and the post. I like that.

What's the threshold for a tag?

Just add context as a top level comment or in the body text area. Someone can come in to clarify if the poster is missing it.

Even for a poster sometimes it's not obvious if there is any AI in the project. Example: Lutris, dev said they are adding Claude commits and will be scrubbing mentions of the tool from PRs. Sometimes AI is discussed but rejected.

It's easy to tell when a whole project has been vibecoded, but the grey zone of an existing project that may or may not have had slopcode added, is tougher for posters to discern.

If you make a tag for AI, what's the purpose of making everything people want to see explicitly say (not AI)?

People that want to use that shit, need to learn to be upfront about and realistic about how the vast majority of people view AI produced.... Well, ai anything.

Yes

I'd rather not even see whatever that [meta] tag thing is people keep using. I see it and instantly think Facebook and disregard anything that's said for obvious reasons.

but hey, add tags for everything more tags, use # also, and whatever other things. full the pages with tags upon tags so posts are annoying to read