Sur le microblogging: @[email protected] Sur le web: https://www.rako.space/
Sur xmpp: [email protected]
Sur deltachat: https://i.delta.chat/#F2EACE10C8C69DE92EE5B72B308C75A6FA0B3479=&i=AXCOWs9ZS0ZlgudzJAm8ERqz&s=WZ2khNFSyDdAW-N3yjqQTnTK&a=phj2so4ey%40nine.testrun.org&n=Invite (si vous n’êtes pas du spam je vous ajouterai à mon vrai compte)

  • 1 Post
  • 11 Comments
Joined 9 months ago
Cake day: January 7th, 2026
  • rako@tarte.nuage-libre.frtoSelfhosted@lemmy.world•Wikidocs (for storing your home-lab structure)Français
    13·
    2 days ago

    I see you want to sink me under a lot of points, allow me to do the same:

    1. You’d have to be really naive to think that a project contains four AGENTS.md files and pretend AI wasn’t used
    2. .editorconfig is, at it says, a config for editors. You can pretty much infer that an editor was used, but you can’t say which. Just like an AGENTS.md indicates an AI was used, or is expected to be used, but you can’t know which one
    3. I said this project is AI-oriented, which the phrase you cite conforts.
    4. No one here is saying that Claude coded it. I raised the point because I assume AI was used, and this is what the policy talks about
    5. “Your promotional post” talks about the post, not the project
    6. “If you are promoting a project” talks about you promoting the project, meaning the post, not the project
    7. This is /c/selfhosted on lemmy.world. Other communities have other rules. The post you point to is made in another community, it’s irrelevant here.
    8. This is /c/selfhosted on lemmy.world. I’m asking the question in the community. Note that my instance isn’t lemmy.world.
    9. The discussion isn’t stickied nor linked from the rules. But it does exist

    Shall we next audit every IDE autocomplete suggestion the dev ever accepted, look at their CV, review their commit history and inspect what they ate for lunch?

    Is it possible to discuss as adults or do you have to resort to absurd arguments ?

    I assume that the tags don’t exist but to convey information. The information is relevant whether the author of the post is the author of the project or not, that’s why I asked for it.

    If you want my opinion on something that, as you said, as already be decided: if it’s too complicated to know whether AI was used, then flag it as AIP. There will be issues, just like any decision, but it will be a different set of issues. But are you really interested in my opinion or do you just want to pretend differing opinions are absurd ?

    Or can we just share cool things we find and let end users make up their own minds?

    That wouldn’t be in the spirit of disclosure, the one that was accepted by the community and for which you pinged a moderator now would it

  • rako@tarte.nuage-libre.frOPtoSelfhosted@lemmy.world•[META] Should [AIP] also apply to projects not from the author ?Français
    1·
    2 days ago

    Just like the discussion last time on this - every user will not be able to be a forensically review.

    I didn’t see it ! Sorry about that.

    Just like the discussion last time on this - every user will not be able to be a forensically review.

    AGENTS.md in a repository are used to guide development. The very file talks about using typescript; you don’t need typescript to use the app do you ?

    So if you’d like to propose this

    I was just asking for a precision, but that’s because I didn’t check archives enough

    And I don’t see any option for how this could be realistically implemented.

    I see at least one: if the project doesn’t have a clear no-ai policy, then assume it is AIP. But that’s not my proposition at the moment.