this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2026
556 points (95.6% liked)

Fuck AI

6309 readers
1553 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Lutris maintainer use AI generated code for some time now. The maintainer also removed the co-authorship of Claude, so no one knows which code was generated by AI.

Anyway, I was suspecting that this "issue" might come up so I've removed the Claude co-authorship from the commits a few days ago. So good luck figuring out what's generated and what is not.

sauce 1

sauce 2

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] LoafedBurrito@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This explains why the updates have ruined everything in the past month. I turned off updates on Lutris so my games will actually still work.

AI sucks and needs to go away.

[–] TheFinn@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 day ago

The flatpak version finally updated its dependencies on an out of date library, so that much is an improvement. I don't use it for much though, mainly to run origin or whatever they're calling it now.

[–] crypt0cler1c 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Lutris was always trash

[–] Zink@programming.dev 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Tangent: crediting Claude with co-authorship? wtf?

I can totally see the mega-techs trying to push that in EULAs, but for an individual to do it seems strange, even though there's a kernel of honesty behind it. It also seems risky as far as OpenMetaMicroogleAI finding future loopholes to steal your shit.

This dev talks like they are doing everything else the right way, as far as reviewing and understanding the code regardless of its source. In that situation I'd look at blocks of LLM-generated code the same way as ones copy/pasted from stackoverflow or 3rd party example code. At BEST you have "here's something that might work" which is nowhere close to actually being done if you're any good. (insert joke about "it compiles, ship it!)

[–] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 13 points 1 day ago

Cory Doctorow explores this in his most recent column, describing the concept of "Centaurs" and "Reverse Centaurs".

A centaur is a human piloting a machine body. They're faster and stronger because of the machine, but the human is in charge. A reverse centaur is a machine piloting a human body; a brainless head on a largely inferior body.

In the context of generative AI, centaurs are people use AI tools carefully, intentionally, and of their own volition. They have the knowledge necessary to assess when the output of the machine tools is good or bad, and the machine simply becomes, like any other tool, a way of leveraging their abilities more efficiently.

A reverse centaur is when you have a "human in the loop." An intern told to write a stack of columns that would take ten experienced writers a week, in only a few days, but don't worry you can just use ChatGPT it'll be so fast. That person really only exists for two purposes; to push the buttons that make the machine go, and, far more importantly, to eat the blame when the machine fucks up. They were the "human in the loop" so they were supposed to catch the bad output, but they were never given the time or the expertise to do so, and they were placed in a scenario where using genAI was the only possible choice to get the outcome that was demanded of them.

I don't see the use of AI tools, especially in areas that they are well suited to like coding, as automatically befitting the "AI slop" descriptor. Gen AI can be extremely effective as a coding assistant, when used with care, and by someone with enough knowledge to read the output and understand it completely. As you say, a huge amount of normal everyday coding has, for decades, been copy and pasting code blocks because why the fuck would repeat work that someone else has already done??? And for decades bad coders have screwed themselves over by copy-pasting code they don't understand or didn't bother to properly read and parse. That's nothing new.

Now, it's also completely reasonable for people to hold ethical objections to genAI that are entirely separate from any practical concerns. If someone's position is "I do not care how good the output is, because I believe it comes from a fundamentally immoral technology", I think that's a completely cogent moral stance. I have no argument against that. I'd just ask to not use the term "AI slop" when describing that objection, because I think it really muddies the waters and makes it extremely unclear what you're actually objecting to. If your problem is one of ethics, say that. Don't just re-use a term you heard elsewhere that's tangentially related.

[–] ColdWater@lemmy.ca 36 points 2 days ago

I'm tired boss

[–] wizardbeard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 192 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (7 children)

The snipe from the dev about removing the co-authorship is particularly shitty.

Devs of open source software need the thick skin to be able to say "This is how I'm going to handle things as long as I'm the lead, you don't have to like it." but this goes beyond it into an active "fuck you" to their users.

Edit: the second link has less charged discussion, but it's still getting wrapped up in "anthropic bad" stuff that's not actually related to code quality.

If the project is not the space for non-code quality concerns like Anthropic's business dealings, then it is also not the place for one of the devs to try their personal social project of "seeing if contributors can differentiate between AI assisted commits and not". Listing claude as a co-author where it was used serves a practical purpose of drawing extra eyes for review of relevant commits.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] e8d79@discuss.tchncs.de 55 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (9 children)

Turns out GloriousEggroll who is best known for Nobara and GE-Proton is defending this shit as well.

Source

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 36 points 2 days ago (3 children)

It's really hard to argue against that final paragraph though for real. These are free time projects that people spend time on for the benefit of others. I dunno. Food for thought?

[–] throws_lemy@lemmy.nz 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Actually you can refute that argument since the main dev defends Anthropic as a good guy compared to other AI companies. As we know Claude being used by Pentagon in the war with Iran. But shouldn't use that, it will drag into unnecessary argument war, since they have set in mind to use AI generated-code.

And that leaves us with no choice but to use alternatives, as they have removed AI co-authorship.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] throws_lemy@lemmy.nz 23 points 2 days ago

This kind of thinking is what makes billionaires who back AI companies to keep increasing their investments in AI Capex, while leaving others with nothing but increasingly expensive parts and damaged environments.

[–] DFX4509B@lemmy.wtf 12 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Come on, is there anything that's safe?!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] hazelthefluffyfox@pawb.social 16 points 2 days ago

oh yes. i caught their comment on github about this already.

if i had the time i'd fork this and block AI contributions outright. slop certainly doesn't belong in something that allows us linux users to play something that's windows exclusive, cause lord knows what it'll break.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] etherphon@piefed.world 125 points 2 days ago (17 children)

I don't get it, why would you take a program (or ANYTHING) you created and let some AI shit all over it. I will never.

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 59 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Am I allowed to have an unpopular narrative here?

There are levels of vibe coding, and it's possible to use AI without vibe coding at all.

If you're very targeted in what you're having the AI do and you carefully review the code, it can be a great tool.

For example, "make this html grid sortable and add a download button that creates a csv file." You know exactly what this does, it's self contained, and it's something you know can just be copied from stack overflow and applied to your code.

That works, and works well.

"Create an app that..." is vibe coded slop.

[–] raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world 30 points 2 days ago (4 children)

For example, “make this html grid sortable and add a download button that creates a csv file.” You know exactly what this does, it’s self contained, and it’s something you know can just be copied from stack overflow and applied to your code.

Even if this works, you'll be stealing someone else's code without authorship attribution for anything that's a non-trivial algorithm.

[–] zarniwoop@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 18 hours ago

Let me introduce you to Stackoverflow...or well, what it used to be.

[–] Auth@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago

Most devs are already doing that. This just saves them the time of doing it for themselves.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] psycotica0@lemmy.ca 44 points 2 days ago (12 children)

I'm going to assume from the part where they say they were at their lowest that the option the saw infront of them wasn't "code with AI or not" but rather "burnout and don't code, or code with AI". And they chose to make progress using the crutch rather than stop. That's my guess.

load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
[–] Reygle@lemmy.world 39 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Edit: new development. Learning Epic launcher and it's better so far. Have removed Lutris. Let me pretend this is a win for a little while before telling me that it is equally fucked, thanks

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] LucidNightmare@anarchist.nexus 49 points 2 days ago (6 children)

Can a motherfucker get a break, PLEASE.

I use Lutris for games that don't work in Steam/Proton, usually an older game like Black and White 2 or the old Sims 2 game (before the updated version came out). Why is everything I like turning to shit! :(

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 53 points 2 days ago (17 children)

That's funny, not long ago people were giving me shit for saying Lutris is a confusing, unintuitive mess.

Well I guess now we know why.

load more comments (17 replies)
[–] Crozekiel@lemmy.zip 34 points 2 days ago (10 children)

I always found Lutris to be troublesome at best. Always had better luck with Bottles.

From reading the posted threads the Lutris devs have even bigger red flags, the AI usage seems like just another symptom of their total disdain for the users of their program.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] tdawg@lemmy.world 13 points 2 days ago

I wonder how long models will stay stable if the code they're trained on becomes increasingly ai generated

[–] ZombieCyborgFromOuterSpace@piefed.ca 33 points 2 days ago (2 children)

You know what's great about open source software?

You can fork it and turn it into your own project. With black jack and hookers.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] UpperBroccoli@lemmy.blahaj.zone 26 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Can it even still call itself open source when it is entirely unclear where the AI they used took the code from, and under what license it was published?

What even does using AI regurgitated code do to the license of a software product? Because basically what they are doing is exactly the same as going through shit tons of comments on stackoverflow and copying them verbatim into the code base. Without attribution or regard to licensing.

What shit.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TabbsTheBat@pawb.social 47 points 2 days ago (9 children)

Dam. Glad I never really used lutris lol

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›