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

  • uncouple9831@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    Why would that be anyone other than the original author? This sounds like a hosting service is refusing to host things based on what tool was used in creation. “Anyone using emacs can’t upload code to GitHub anymore” seems equivalently valid.

    • vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      9 hours ago

      in the case of ai generated code, that is almost always the case. People say “but I review all my pet neural network’s code!” but they don’t. If they did, the job would actuallydtake longer. Reading and understanding code takes longer than writing it.

      • uncouple9831@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        5 hours ago

        I don’t think this is in response to my message. If that was the intent, I think you need to define what “that” is, which is always the case.

    • imecth@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      11 hours ago

      GNOME manually reviews every extension, and they understandably don’t want to review AI generated code.

      • uncouple9831@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        Oh…an actually human response. How refreshing. At least one person here got their rabies shot.

        Do they actually review it or is it like how android and apple “review” apps? And why would they be reviewing the code rather than putting it through some test suite/virus scanning suite or something? That is, this shit isn’t going away any time soon even if the bubble pops, so why not find a way to avoid the work rather than ban people who make the work “too hard”?

          • uncouple9831@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 hours ago

            I’m calm, but since you need to hear it: nobody has ever in the history of the human race received the command to “calm down” and had it make them calmer. So chill out broski.

          • uncouple9831@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            4 hours ago

            Oof this just makes it so much worse. It sounds like they have two complaints:

            There are more extensions being made now. Good. If you can’t keep up, charge money to review them or something. Even charging 10 cents will drop submissions instantly.

            The extensions have unnecessary try/catch blocks. And it’s not just any try catch blocks that aren’t necessary…it’s only the ai-generated unnecessary try catch blocks. Human-generated unnecessary try/catch blocks are fine. This is dumb and a dumb example because it’s a structure whose behavior is well understood and well defined. I add unnecessary try/catch blocks to my code all the time if I don’t feel like digging in at the moment to figure out all of the failure modes of some function. It’s only when a LLM does it that it upsets the poster. Ridiculous.

    • fodor@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      12 hours ago

      Yes it would be someone else. If the code looks good then it might last a long time, and it could even be expanded upon. One key point of FOSS is that anyone can change it, and if it’s good, people will.

      • uncouple9831@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        Great, so then it’s someone reading new code either way, so it shouldn’t matter if it’s in the LLM style or random human A’s style, it’s still something you have to read and learn.

        But also I wonder if there’s an analysis of how many of these extensions has ever been touched by more than a single human, ever. I don’t know, but I sure wouldn’t be surprised if the answer is 80%.

      • uncouple9831@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        5 hours ago

        And is that something that happens regularly with gnome extensions? My recollection is they are a barely functioning collection of random trash code. Were they all written by contractors who got fired?