this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2025
468 points (99.0% liked)

Linux

10979 readers
294 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)

Also, check out:

Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The GNOME.org Extensions hosting for GNOME Shell extensions will no longer accept new contributions with AI-generated code. A new rule has been added to their review guidelines to forbid AI-generated code.

Due to the growing number of GNOME Shell extensions looking to appear on extensions.gnome.org that were generated using AI, it's now prohibited. The new rule in their guidelines note that AI-generated code will be explicitly rejected

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] refalo@programming.dev 15 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

How is AI-generated content detected and what is the process for disputing such claims?

[–] ArsonButCute@lemmy.dbzer0.com 26 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Just an example:

I'm a programming student. In one of my classes we had a simple assignment. Write a simple script to calculate factorials. The purpose of this assignment was to teach recursion. Should be doable in 4-5 lines max, probably less. My coed decided to vibe code his assignment and ended up with a 55 line script. It worked, but it was literally %1100 of the length it needed to be with lots of dead functions and 'None->None(None)' style explicit typing where it just simply wasn't needed.

The code was hilariously obviously AI code.

Edit: I had like 3/4 typos here

[–] RagingRobot@lemmy.world -1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Not all AI code is so obvious though. Especially if you give it detailed instructions on what to do exactly. It could be very hard to tell in some cases

[–] brian@programming.dev 17 points 3 weeks ago

if it's not clear if it's ai, it's not the code this policy was targeting. this is so they don't have to waste time justifying removing the true ai slop.

if the code looks bad enough to be indistinguishable from ai slop, I don't think it matters that it was handwritten or not.

[–] kadu@scribe.disroot.org 14 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I guess the practical idea is that if your AI generated code is so good and you've reviewed it so well that it fools the reviewer, the rule did it's job and then it doesn't matter.

But most of the time the AI code jumps out immediately to any experienced reviewer, and usually for bad reasons.

[–] refalo@programming.dev -5 points 3 weeks ago

So then it's not really a blanket "no-AI" rule if it can't be enforceable if it's good enough? I suppose the rule should have been "no obviously bad AI" or some other equally subjective thing?

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 10 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] AllHailTheSheep@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

wow. that dude is a piece of work. made the mistake of clicking one of the links to his blog, and wow. there's a stunning lack of knowledge or self respect there

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone -5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

It's not hard, just use your eyes or an AI-detector

[–] brian@programming.dev 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

ai detectors are not good. may as well ask your magic 8 ball

[–] CXORA@aussie.zone 1 points 3 weeks ago

Which is how the code was generated in the first place.