obelisk_complex

Yes, and it’s actually pretty good at it. The code won’t be the most efficient, it won’t be elegant or beautiful… but it will mostly work, and someone with technical experience can get it over the line. Case in point: I can “sort of” code, but my career has been spent writing simple scripts. Nothing more complicated than workstation provisioning, find and replace with some regex, PowerShell with a WinForms GUI, etc. Despite being relatively low level in terms of actually building applications, I’ve been able to “project manage” and hand-edit Claude output into a working application. It’s basically just a frontend for FFMPEG, with some smarts and automation built in. Not particularly impressive in absolute terms, but it’s a lot snappier and prettier than anything else I’ve ever put together and I’m proud of it. I got it from concept to working in a few days, and added major features plus a few efficiency passes and bug fixes in two weeks - an absolutely incredible pace.

This comment is going to get absolutely nuked with downvotes, I guarantee it - but that won’t change the fact that I’m successfully building stuff with AI.

I spent quite a lot of effort getting Stoat up and running because they aren’t working on the selfhosted version, only to get a nice email from the German government that my server was running an outdated version of React with RCE vulnerabilities. Nuked that stack at 3am.

Also I fixed their Tenor integration to be provider agnostic so the self-hoster could choose a different gif provider like klipy (Tenor turned off their API so gif search in Stoat is broken), tried to contribute that one small change back to the main project, immediately rejected because “we have no plans for klipy support”.

Not worth the effort, IMO.

Edit: Screw it, not worth it. Blocked, please return the favour, cheers ‘n’ thanks.

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.

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.

Agree completely, these shenanigans are a big reason I’m on a selfhosting rampage at the minute. Speaking of, does anyone have favourite self-hosted alternatives?