cross-posted from: https://lemmy.nz/post/35264413
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.
Well, if it’s do the thing well it’s not slop. And a clanker is the best thing to do routine repetitive work. As I know, lutris is a bunch of scripts to make wine work. That’s the right place for a LLM as a tool. And I don’t understand the whining about removing the “co-authorship”, why the hell is a clanker an author? It’s a tool, not a person, it can’t have any rights.
Fully agree. I think Slop is getting polluted (especially here on Lemmy) to anything that even remotely touches AI. We’ve had AI for decades. We’ve had LLMs now for a while. Slop is something relatively new. For me, Slop is low-quality bullshit that is thrown out into the void for clicks and likes, a cheap alternative when a better solution exists.
I recently was given an excel document I had to convert, with about 50 columns on it. I had to build a regular import. Now, I could spend a few hours typing that in manually as a C# class, or a few hours coding up some script to scrape the headers into the type, or I could utilize a tool that I have that will spit it out for me into a class. I don’t consider this slop, I consider this the grain of truth that all the tech bros fixate their grand embellishments around. AI does have usages. It’s not nearly what they think it is, but it is there.