Yeah, that’s sort of my gripe with it. If you genuinely believe all AI code is bad (which is fine, not saying that’s a “wrong” opinion) maybe try to help the volunteers instead of just insulting them on an issue tracker.

But as you can see, the maintainer didn’t stop using them and will also now not disclose which commits have them. Humans are emotional creatures and part of being rational is acknowledging that. Folks can be critical of AI usage while phrasing the issue more tactfully and would likely see more success when doing so.

Maybe, I don’t know much about this tool or their practices. I only meant that it was factual that they were mentioning which commits had AI generated code in them.

Hence the past tense. I think it was pretty petty to do this.

I’m not saying you shouldn’t ever raise this sort of thing as an issue (in general I think issues should only be for bugs, but the annoying reality is there’s rarely a better place for discussions that get visibility), I’m saying the specific content of the message is the problem. There are ways to critique the usage of AI and discuss alternatives that wouldn’t be an issue.

For example,

I see a lot of AI code is used in this repository. AI code is bad because (reasons the user believes it is bad here). Could you please share why/what AI is being used for specifically so we can try to remove the necessity?

Perhaps more maintainers are needed, maybe someone more familiar with third party libs being used could mentor, etc. From there it really depends on what the response from the maintainer is.

What’s not helpful and never going to get anyone to change their opinion is just saying things like “when will @mention see the error of their ways”. As humans we respond to this by digging our heels in, which as seen in the issue the maintainer did by becoming less transparent about where AI is and is not used. Had the reporter taken a more diplomatic approach they would have been more likely to get the changes they wanted.

As the maintainer said, the commits with AI code were already specified. See one here. It was never a secret.

is lutris slop now

i can’t help but notice quite a lot of LLM generated commits, is lutris slop now or will @strycore see the error of their ways

Regardless of your opinion on AI, it is not productive or helpful to open this as an issue.

Also, Adventure Quest had a subscription (not necessarily micro transactions) and the image for Bloons TD is, as far as I understand, from modern Bloons with micro transactions.

Donko Donko Literate Club

I hate shit like this. Fym we celebrated it’s downfall?? Excuse you?? I was not happy about it.

Oobinga is so overrated… Archunga, btw

Jesus fucking Christ, I didn’t realize they uploaded and were able to convince people that’s fair use. Torrenting copyrighted content legal now I guess?

They said they didn’t wanna carry ice. There’s no reason why it wouldn’t work, they just didn’t want to bother with ice.

If you get anything digitized, sanity check the results, my mother in law got some done that were really weird, like some other family’s stuff and then it just cut out or something. I don’t think they put any effort into making sure it was correct. Especially if it’s somewhere disposing of the originals.

It’s for a portable cooler though, you’re not optimizing for heat removal per watt, you’re optimizing for size and weight.

In general it wasn’t too bad but there were some times playing late at night, deep underground when the ambient noise that plays when you’re near caves or whatever would spook me.

An especially haunted copy of Hey You Pikachu

I’ve never seen zoomers get scared of this game

Ah, of course. The model isn’t wrong, it’s the input that’s wrong. Yes, yes. Please give me investment money now.

Finally, T10