@linuxnation@mbin.linuxnation.social
2026-10-09 21:55 UTC
Replies (8)
-
@eremophila@lemmy.zip 2026-10-09 22:08
This suggests that it has to be disclosed to the reviewers, which is a good thing, but how will end users be made aware? I only use 6 flatpaks (due them not being available in the arch official repo’s) and I get them via a gui package manager. I’m assuming I am going to have to modify how I do this for any future installs, and check my existing ones, but then what about future releases/updates? A ‘no ai’ swtich/toggle would be swell.
-
@SocialistVibes01@lemmy.ml 2026-10-09 23:06
🤦♂️
-
@reader@lemmy.zip 2026-10-10 00:06
there should be a place for ai apps, that is separate from human built apps
-
@pineapple@lemmy.ml 2026-10-10 01:49
I don’t have an issue with this. If it’s AI you can usually tell, if you can’t tell then it’s not slop and it’s fine to use.
-
@bretton.dev@coves.social 2026-10-10 02:01
Probably the right decision given there's no way to truly tell what level of AI generation or effort within the project itself with AI has taken place. I understand the willingness to ban low effort low quality one shot projects, but given most software nowadays incorporating some level of LLMs, I can't ever see a blanket ban working out anywhere.
-
@wilmo@lemmy.ml 2026-10-10 03:25
I think they should just create a policy where unmaintained software gets removed? Or flagged where it’s easy to filter out. Most AI slop just gets abandoned, but a real developer who wants to maintain FOSS software long term with some AI assistance is quite a different thing.
-
@turbowafflz@lemmy.world 2026-10-10 04:45
i feel like my coupons aren’t working
-
@sirico@feddit.uk 2026-10-10 07:27
By and large flathubs metadata has allowed for pretty transparent overviews. Stick the same filtering that safe and unsafe containers have and everyone retains a clear choice.