Update: not hiding it anymore. https://github.com/lutris/lutris/discussions/6530#discussioncomment-16107836
Got it, so block any further updates till there’s a backtrack or a fork.
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.
Great way to torpedo any trust people might’ve had in your project.
Update: The attributions are back.
Since it’s such a big fuss, I’m putting the Claude attribution back.
https://github.com/lutris/lutris/discussions/6530#discussioncomment-16107836
Yeah, nah. Damage has been done already.
He should’ve stuck with his guns and said “the Claude code stays”.
He did. You may have misunderstood.
He did. You may have misunderstood.
I mean he should have simply stated “the Claude code stays”, instead of hiding which were the Claude commits.
It is kind of hilarious that this is actually the issue here. Sure, using AI for coding can be problematic. But then going back and removing any reference to it just to fuck with people even more. Damn.
While I hate AI as much as the next guy. It’s also entirely true that people are attacking and harassing people for using making them a worse problem.
I’m entirely down for fucking with the dipshits who can’t help themselves but be massive twats.
If your going to have a shit show might as well make it a good one.
I think it’s hilarious how much it’s bothering you guys
CAREFUL! That’s borderline troll thinking.
Oh you don’t like to know when we put shit in your food so you can scrutinize it? Fine we’ll just not tell you.
Congratz now ALL of it contains shit.
Schrodinger’s Backdoor
All jokes aside, Windows (pre ai) was filled with backdoors now. Still is, probably has more, but it never stopped them in the past.
“Haha now you won’t know what is or isn’t slop!!”
“But then we’ll just assume it’s all slop…”
“…D’oh!!!”
They’d assume that anyway. The self-proclaimed haters have a one-drop rule.
That’s why this author didn’t exactly announce it - they were trying to dodge a harassment campaign.
Then they don’t read very much. They streisand effected themselves.
They are making the point that you won’t be able to tell the difference. & It’s a salient one.
Doesn’t give much confidence in their coding abilities then.
Okay. I guess you want the volunteer open source dev to write everything by hand from scratch so it will pass your high standards. That’s on you, honestly.
Thats like…exactly how its been done up to this point???
Ahh yes, how dare a community run and funded project have community accountability.
The project has several ways of being community funded.
Accountability for what!? You people have lost your minds.
Ah yes, if anyone is against AI, because of its problems, then we’ve all lost our minds.
Are YOU the dev in question, or do you just have an unreasonably huge boner for AI?
I happen to agree w the developer that peoples’ problem w AI is actually a problem w Capitalism
Yes, that is what we want. Or at least everything past boilerplate templates.
Even if that were true, which it isn’t, there are plenty of other reasons to scrutinize any use of “generative” AI.
Like…?
Like that it produces hallucinated bullshit and anyone can see that with any given 2-3 Google searches now. It’s literally impossible to miss that if you use the Internet now.
I’m not a fanboi of AI, but also not all AI is equally capable. You can be upset for ethical reasons, you can dislike some things it produces for style reasons, and yes it does sometimes produce code that feels like it should work, even though it doesn’t. All of these things are true.
But also Claude doing coding is very different than the AI answers on Google searches, and even those are much better than a cherry-picked highlight reel of bad results on a blog post.
Again, you don’t have to like AI or agree with its use, but claiming the code Claude produces is fully bullshit because some customer support chatbot does a bad job is just being misinformed. You should at least know your enemy and its capabilities.
You took that way too literally
“You didn’t like what I was doing? No fucking problem I’ll just lie about it moving forward”
No reason to hide the Claude contributions if his reasoning isn’t flawed. Honestly, my biggest beef is using AI as a subscription service, there are plenty of local LLM alternatives, and that just feeds the incentive for the web crawlers currently assaulting the Internet, for the companies also tucking in surveillance and training on your use of their AI.
Honestly, it can save you having to search through wordy API documentation, as long as you bother to make sure to make sure you end up knowing the hows and whys of what it is presenting you and whether it is good programming methodology. In a lot of ways it is no different and even faster than having to search for the answers through support forums and stack overflow. It might be built upon IP theft, but unfortunately in practical terms, you will be at a disadvantage against people that use it, so you might as well use it in a way that does not give them any way to profit off of it (Local LLMs). I’d argue that the case against these applications of generative AI is way different than those for image and video generation.
The biggest problem is when developers begin to depend on it too much without learning the nuance, but it would be a lie if there aren’t a lot of developers who contribute to Open Source without really bothering to familiarize with it already and who are more interested in the end goal than best practices. Not sure if this will make the problem better or worse, but devs who use AI without bothering to learn will have a hell of a time providing proper maintenance for their code.
Not disagreeing with you, but Anthropic believes code is the path to AGI.
I want to be clear so somebody doesn’t have a fit - I do not personally believe LLMs are capable of AGI. But this isn’t about what I believe.
They believe that coding is the path because it’s verifiable and a generatable. Frontier AI companies aren’t training on the global internet anymore, it’s poisoned with AI slop. Non-frontier AI companies do, we’ve all seen it. But it’s my opinion that non frontier AI companies are basically all but irrelevant (I’m not talking about open source/hugging face). Anthropic knows this, and their idea (again, not mine, don’t get mad at me please!) is that by training on code their AI will get better at non-coding activities as well, and if they make it good enough at coding it’ll become truly intelligent in all ways.
What I’m getting at is, there’s lots of good reasons to avoid using LLMs/AIs/Companies that shove ai down my throat (looking at you Microsoft- I don’t fucking want copilot in my fucking notepad - if anybody from MS is reading this fuck your AI in everything and fuck your AI ridden operating system), but local LLMs are not a replacement for Opus and Anthropic isn’t scraping the open internet anymore. I’m sure they did at first though.
The biggest problem is when developers begin to depend on it too much without learning the nuance I couldn’t agree more. The brain is like a muscle, if you use it, it gets stronger. If you don’t, it gets weaker. “Vibe” coding is using your brain at a minimum, and if all you do is vibe out slop you’re not really learning much.
local LLMs are not a replacement for Opus
https://www.bitdoze.com/best-open-source-llms-claude-alternative/
Something tells me you haven’t even made the effort. They are not that good, in the same way that LibreOffice is not as good as Excel. But if you are going to make the argument you quote, then you can work that brain muscle and adapt.
And they aren’t training off of the Internet because they are training on your input. It’s mind-boggling to me how some people are so willing to train their replacements while also paying them for the effort to do so for an advantage set very temporary in the future we are heading. A lot of your criticism doesn’t even apply to local LLMs - either they are trained by model distillation from more advances models or because they are images temporally set in stone. It’s also telling how implicitly willing you seem to be able to let the Internet burn, because the inevitability is becoming a corporate slave and accepting their ever increasing subscription fees which you can’t ignore because “hey, they’ve got the most users, the Internet is too dead, your open alternatives are no replacements for us”. You say you are not, but you are saying everything an AI AGI astrosurfer would be saying, and the irony of hearing this in an open source “federated” platform over something like Reddit is paramount.
It’s only slop if you don’t know what you’re doing and/or are using low quality tools. But I have over 30 years of programming experience and use the best tool currently available. It was tremendously helpful in helping me catch up with everything I wasn’t able to do last year because of health issues / depression.
It sounds like they thought it through and decided it’s the best way to do the work. Removing the attributions seems like a little bit of a petty “fuck you”, but so is opening a github issue just to whine about AI. Someone who is volunteering their time to make free software shouldn’t have to put up with people with an ideological bone to pick who feel entitled to tell them how.
Having read the article, some points from the dev make sense, but also he acted like a princess by the end, so a bit of a messy situation.
Uninstalled, bye bye ai slop.
What decides if something is slop or not is the thing itself. It is not your “KwaLiFiKaShunz”. Bringing up “muh 30 years of XP lol lmao” means jack shit.
If he was co-authoring the code with Claude this means he submitted code made by Claude; he didn’t just ask for some examples and implement in his own way. The later would be far more reasonable than the former.
What he said about the problem being capitalism instead of the tool itself is, I believe, valid. However, it should be no excuse to unnecessarily feed that very same economic system, by paying for the bloody tool.
Finally. He could’ve fixed what people complained about, by removing the commits, so he would keep them happy. He could also stick to his guns, and say “no, I’m not changing it. The Claude code stays”. But he did neither; instead he’s hiding it from the users. That’s pretty much the same as saying “I’m going to treat users as gullible filth and easy to fool, instead of human beings deserving honesty.”
A good thing open software can be forked.
More specifically, it means they made commits with it. If you use it but commit yourself there’s no coauthored.
Or just add a note to your memory md…
The way y’all overuse the word “slop” is like calling all e-mail “spam.” Both are supposed to refer to a deluge of nonsense nobody asked for. This author has an LLM in-the-loop, plainly on purpose and with purpose, and it seems to be working out.
If any interaction with spicy autocomplete is treated as equally bad, to the point of aggressive mockery - no kidding people will tune that out. It’s not constructive or sincere. It borders on abusive. How much coverage did this guy just get, where the comments are all ‘well if he’d just done [blank]–,’ and how many people actually believe that [blank] would result in fewer snide comments?
The way y’all overuse the word “slop” is like calling all e-mail “spam.”
It’s more like calling automatically sent e-mails “spam”. From the PoV of the [software | e-mail] user saying the word, both [slop | spam] are undesirable, even if the [coder | marketing team] in question is doing it on purpose and with purpose, to further their goals of [pumping out more software | reaching a wider audience].
If any interaction with spicy autocomplete is treated as equally bad, to the point of aggressive mockery - no kidding people will tune that out.
For me at least the worst part isn’t using it, but trying to hide it. I don’t think it’s justified, even if some users return snide comments because of it.
The difference is that marketing is trying to sell you things to part you from your money. How much does Lutris cost? Yeah, it’s free and open source, so the motivations are completely different - including the motivations for using AI.
When it comes to the usage of both words, that difference you listed is completely arbitrary and obviously irrelevant. People also use the word “slop” to refer to commercial software (see: “Microslop”) and “spam” to refer to any sort of undesirable email being mass sent, even if non-commercial.
Unless you’re trying to argue something else; that the slop in this specific case is more justified. Then refer to the top comment in the chain; frankly the main issue here is not adding slop to their software, it’s the eagerness to treat users as braindead trash undeserving transparency.
When it comes to the usage of both words, that difference you listed is completely arbitrary and obviously irrelevant
What? No. Software is something people go looking for and choose to download, unless we’re talking about malware which I think is fair to say is obviously outside the bounds of this conversation. Spam emails are forced on people without their asking or looking for them. They’re not at all interchangeable or the same thing.
Most people don’t care how their software is written, just like they don’t care how their food is actually made. And by “most people” I don’t mean you or anyone else here on Lemmy, I mean the majority of people who use computers. You wouldn’t believe how technically illiterate and uncurious the average person is - that’s who I mean. Those people hate spam emails, but they don’t care if their email app was vibecoded with AI. They don’t even know the difference between AI code and hand-typed human code, and most of 'em probably think “more code is better so AI is better!”.
Unless you’re trying to argue something else; that the slop in this specific case is more justified.
Sort of. I’m saying that while I understand why AI disclosures are a good thing, I think that if a person is not paying for an application and they’re not contributing to its development, then that person can keep their opinions on the development process to themselves. They can take those opinions and go build something of their own to satisfy them.
it’s the eagerness to treat users as braindead trash undeserving transparency.
I simply don’t think that’s a fair characterisation, because it ignores how people treat the developers who use the tools in the first place. People who have no technical skills whatsoever are happy to loudly shit all over said developers and call their work garbage - work they’ve been doing for nothing.
I agree the initial response could have been approached better, but all of us have the benefit of judging in hindsight and from a distance. I can understand how their emotions got the better of them, while under fire like that. This looks distinctly different from the BookLore fiasco though, where the dev is trying to close up the source in retaliation.
I just wish people would find more reasonable targets for their ire, instead of rolling with the pitchforks-and-torches mentality. Individuals building open source software are not usually reasonable targets. I do think “good thing it’s easy to fork open source” is the right sentiment; this is why anything I build, I put up under the Unlicense, because as far as I’m concerned any utility someone can get from it is to the good.
What? No. Software is something people go looking for and choose to download, unless we’re talking about malware which I think is fair to say is obviously outside the bounds of this conversation. Spam emails are forced on people without their asking or looking for them.
Yeah, and that’s totally a criterion people use when labelling something “slop” or not, right? Right??? Oh wait, no, it isn’t.
They’re not at all interchangeable or the same thing.
That is not even remotely close to what I said. Not bothering further with a liar (or worse) who distorts what others say.
Edit: Screw it, not worth it. Blocked, please return the favour, cheers ‘n’ thanks.
Spicy auto complete is fantastic, I love it
I mean the term
I mean, also the spice if we’re being honest
Both are extremely stolen.
If buying isn’t owning, piracy isn’t stealing. I’m a pirate through and through.
Why? Because I don’t respect capitalists. And I don’t care if they upsets them.
In fact, I kind of hope it upsets them.
But even if he goes metaphorically vegan, his code is still going to feed the AIs.
Which is an entirely different conversation that has nothing to do with this one.
Even if it was the same conversation (as TrickDacy said, it isn’t), “you can’t avoid the harm completely” is no excuse to avoid causing at least some of that harm.
I’m not gonna lie, Lutris is fucking terrible. Basic QOL things are missing. There’s so many disjointed ways of doing so many things. The same 2-5 things need to be set every time you add an app and it’s basically all manual because they have done nothing to make it better. There’s thousands and switches and options, and the only way to find information about what they do is to hit the web… and then you find out so many of them are probably useless.
There’s built in install scripts for things but trying to figure out any information about them within the program itself is also useless.
Then there’s the shit that just doesn’t work. Other tools like Heroic Games Launcher are the only way to install games from providers like epic. You can spend hours troubleshooting this in Lutris, and maybe even get an epic game to install and run once… but everything is going to be a broken mess on try 2.
Just a disappointing app all around once you really start working with it. It’s a shame it seems to be the default mode wine app manager.
Speaking of install scripts, their refusal to version them for “reasons” was my first hint that the project wasn’t in a healthy state.
I’ll be uninstalling tonight.
I just removed Lutris and tried out Bottles last night. How have I never tried it before? It’s so good!
Expect the dev behind it is also a insane twat waffle.
Bottles is about as much of a mess as lutris is with a dev that’s just as crazy.
Generally you have a 50/50 coin flip if lutris or bottles works for you. And for the most part you sorta just try both and see which works then attempt as hard as you can to change nothing so it don’t break. Cause bottles LOVES to break.
I don’t think the dev of Lutris is an insane twat waffle. He and I just disagree on the use of AI code. I foresee the project’s quality declining because of it, and I’d prefer to jump ship now. Lutris wasn’t a big part of my system, so it was really easy. Basically I only ever used it to run WinSCP on Linux.
Lutris has always been a pain in the ass to use. Nothing I set up worked properly. Manually setting things up via Proton has worked just fine for me, so nothing of value was lost with this fiasco.
I’ve been using Faugus and it just works. Every time I try Lutris I get upset.
Never used that shit.
“Add non-Steam game”
That is generally the approach I use, but some games take a bit more setup. I play StarCraft2 for Archipelago and I needed to install it with this app to get the proper script to get it to run successfully. What this app has that Steam doesn’t is the ability for people to create, export, and share custom install and launch profiles for others to use.
With that said I will need to see what Heroic Launcher has to offer.
Ahhh, that is useful.
I used a bit of Heroic and liked it, I hope it fills your needs!
Oh poop, been using lutris and it was pretty good at what it was doing for me. What might be alternatives though?
Heroic is pretty good
Bottles, maybe?
Heroic has been my go to for everything outside of my Steam library.
Heroic. Bottles for the rest.
I’ve found Faugus to just be better.
Heroic and Steam.
Heroic for GOG and Epic games.
Steam for literally everything else: add the .exe as a non-Steam game, find it in your library, go into its properties, set Compatibility > Force Compatibility Mode > Proton Experimental.
Heroic can add games to Steam for you.
I liked Lutris for Battle.net games like Diablo.
Again, Steam does a fine job of that. Add the installer as a non-Steam game, set compatibility, “play” it, then when it’s finished change the shortcut to point to the actual game.
I just fucking install my games like normal with wine if needed.
What is wrong with people that you can’t install something and add a .desktop entry on your system?
I simply can’t take the one-prefix-fits-all approach. Some games play way nicer with older wine versions (especially 32bit games. From the top of my head, The Sims 1 works better for me with Wine 8). A prefix manager is really helpful for managing prefixes with different wine versions that don’t clog up the rest of the system.
But go off being an ass, I guess.
I use wine with winetricks for the manager and the other stuff that makes it easier. I also use q4wine. It’s a GUI for wine written in Qt. Both makes things simpler to varying degrees, and winetricks does have some scripts (though I don’t know how they would compare to lutris)
Neat, thank you, I’ll be taking a peek at that combo!
Lutris furfils several roles that a bunch of
.desktopentries will not.- Its a list of games
- you can search it by title
- you can tag them
- you can sort them in different ways
- you can use wine for some launches, proton for others or native
although i don’t use it, you can log into your steam account (i think also gog?) to get access to games from there.
Think of it, as a more of a plex/jellyfin library for games than a bunch of video files spread around your hdd. I don’t want to remember which games are wine friendly and which need proton or are linux native.
If you really care, I feel like most folks would benefit from checking out
Installing games on linux, even with wine, isnt that hard.
And adding a .desktop entry isnt hard either.
Plasma Bigscreen then nicely gives you a controller friendly UI to pick games from.
