Originally posted by @strycore in #6506: There are massive issues with AI tech, but those are caused by our current capitalist culture, not the tools themselves. In many ways, it couldn't have been...
They can’t fork it now because the fact that the AI commits aren’t labeled as such means there’s no way to tell which need to be removed.
So… they can’t do that because they can’t tell the difference between the human code and the AI’s code? So that means that either A. The human code is also slop or B. The AI’s code is on par with the human’s code. This comment really proves that this aversion to AI is purely ideological.
So… they can’t do that because they can’t tell the difference between the human code and the AI’s code? So that means that either A. The human code is also slop or B. The AI’s code is on par with the human’s code. This comment really proves that this aversion to AI is purely ideological.
Based on the thread I originally linked, and the dev’s response, with regard to Lutris, I think the answer is A.
Being able to see a difference in code quality is one thing; being able to prove who wrote the code for purposes like license compliance is another.