Alterslash picks up to the best 5 comments from each of the day’s Slashdot stories, and presents them on a single page for easy reading.
Reddit’s Largest Open Source Community Dumbfounded By AI Ban: ‘I Guess Linux Is No Longer Allowed?’
Kotaku reports:
r/opensource, Reddit’s primary “subreddit for everything open source related,” has banned all AI-assisted and AI-related projects.... As reported by The Verge, the subreddit’s October 24 post, titled “Your tokens aren’t valuable: No more AI,” features four new main rules: all projects must now be at least “1 year old,” have “multiple contributors,” be posted by someone who must “speak English,” and cannot be “made by” or “intended for” AI… [T]he ban on AI is simple; as the subreddit’s moderators explain, “AI, as it exists today, is incongruent to this Open Source community.” Unsurprisingly, this is the part that’s upset the majority of the users in the thread....
[T]he moderator who posted the new guidelines stated in a separate comment that the overwhelmingly negative response is due to “some guy on twitter claiming to be alternative news” who posted an “opinionated editorial pointing hundreds of people to the thread.” Given the timing of when the thread was posted, alongside the fact that the X post in question mentions “the Linux kernel,” they are presumably referring to this post by The Lunduke Journal. The moderator may be correct, as almost all of the top comments on the post are from users who have never posted in r/opensource before.
The use of AI “doesn’t change whether something is open source or not,” complained one commenter, who added “I guess Linux is no longer allowed here? Linus uses AI for kernel development now.”
The moderator has since updated their post to acknowledge that Redditors have now already created a rival community called r/OpenSourceAIAllowed — plus three more alternatives:
UPDATE (10/26): Monday saw a new comment from the moderator stressing that “Adjustments will be made.”
“Linux is not, nor could conceivably ever be banned. Interpreting any set of rules as such is simply bad faith. Someone’s pet project pumped out in two claude code session limits will not be welcome. The line is somewhere between those, and it will likely move over time from continuous feedback.
“We will cater to humans, and as many and as inclusively as possible. No rule will ever target or favor any ethnicity or social strata.”
25% of Incoming Pull Requests May Be AI Slop, Finds Study From Linux Foundation Research
“59% of maintainers report growing contribution volume since the rise of GenAI,” according to a new study published by Linux Foundation Research. But 25% of their incoming pull requests “are estimated to be low-quality, also known as ‘AI slop’.” And on large projects, 69% see growing contributions — and estimate that 31% are low-quality/AI slop.
So what do these results show us? “Generative AI is fundamentally changing how people participate in open source,” says the head of Open Source Ecosystem Development at Huawei’s R&D subsidiary Futurewei, which helped support the study. Specifically GenAI is “lowering barriers to contribution” but also “creating new challenges” for maintainers and communities. Their recommendation? “Build the governance, transparency and trust mechanisms that allow AI-assisted contributions to strengthen, but not overwhelm, the open source ecosystem.”
“Open source projects need to design for a growing AI-generated contributor base, not simply react to it,” said Hilary Carter, SVP of Research at the Linux Foundation. “That means setting clear expectations for GenAI, putting responsibility for testing and disclosure on contributors and giving maintainers better tools to manage incoming pull requests. If we get those fundamentals right, AI can expand participation without overburdening and increasing costs for maintainers.”
More from the blog It’s FOSS:
LF Research is the Linux Foundation’s research arm. It was set up in 2021 and publishes studies on how open source is built and used, drawing on surveys and project data. Its latest report, Navigating Open Source Software Development in the Generative AI Era, surveyed 234 contributors and maintainers on how generative AI is affecting the way open source gets made…
64% say reviews now take longer. Burnout is their top concern at 63%, narrowly ahead of contribution quality at 60%.
You will also find that policies have not caught up to the AI-assisted coding and vulnerability reporting trend. Of the 119 respondents who answered the question, 35% said their project has a formal policy permitting AI use. Another 32% have none and no plans for one, 23% plan to write one, and 10% ban AI contributions outright....
Most maintainers (71%) say AI makes it easier for newcomers to start contributing.
Other interesting findings:
- “Respondents estimate average time reductions across all six OSS development activities measured, including proposal discussions (19%) and code authoring (52%). For high-complexity tasks, however, 21% of respondents report taking more time when using GenAI.”
- “71% of maintainers agree GenAI reduces barriers to entry for OSS, but 53% of maintainers disagree that GenAI has improved community trust.”
- Developers are reinvesting the time they save back into open source: 66% report using productivity gains to address technical debt, 63% to develop new features and 58% for learning and upskilling.
- Continued investment in human mentorship remains important: 46% of maintainers say GenAI increases the need for mentorship of new contributors, compared with 32% who say it decreases that need.
OpenSSF and LF AI & Data also helped support the study.
RTOAI
I am going to coin a new term. Return To Office as AI. ðY (That is to say: not. We don’t need you anymore. Here’s a buyout.)