Been banned for AI-Slop on a few subs here on Lemmy as well as on Reddit.
I always provide a good amount of technical detail in my posts and i try to be as transparant and communicative about the details. My projects are very complicated and I try to document them well.
my project is pretty cryptography-heavy… the act of me sharing my efforts in an attempt to show transparency… but it is used against my project by calling it AI-slop (undermining Kerkhoff’s principles).
It’s 2026 and most developers are using AI. I have used it to create things like formal proof and verification.
my project is aimed to be a secure messaging app. i have all the bells-and-whistles there along with documentation… but if the conversation cant move past “its AI-generated”… then it seems the cryptography/cybersecurity/privacy community isnt aligned with the fact that using AI is now common practice for developers of all levels.
AI is a tool. you cant (and shouldnt) “trust” AI to do anything without oversight. AI does not replace the due-diligence that has always been needed. i dont “trust” my hammer to bash in a nail… i “use” the hammer. AI is not different in how you need to be responsible for how its used.
i’ve busted my ass on my project for it to be called AI slop. i think its completely fine when it comes from folks in the community. cryptography is a serious subject and my ideas and implementation SHOULD/MUST be scrutinised… but its simply ignorant if mods are banning me for the quality of my work considering the the level of transparency and my engagement on discussions about it.
It’s a bit reductive to call it slop. I think i try harder than most in providing links, code and documentation. Of course I used AI… and it’s clearer for it. (you can find more detail on my profile)
i am of course sour from being banned, but am i wrong to think my code isnt AI slop? Some parts of my project are clearly lazy-ui… but im not sharing on some UI/UX/design sub. the cryptography module has unit tests and formal verification. if that is AI-slop and can result in me being banned, i simply dont have faith in that community to be objective on the reality of where AI can contribute.
while its understandable people dont want to review AI-slop… i think the cryptography/cybersecurity community needs to get on board with the idea of using AI to help in reviewing such code. am i wrong? is the future of cryptography is still people performing manual review of the breathtaking volumes of AI code?
I can and I will.
AI-slop is easy to generate, but there needs to be a recognition that at some point ai-generated code is no longer slop. the failure to recognise that is the issue that seems to have got me banned.
That point is when you have a human expert validate that the ai-generated code is correct. If the community as a whole has given up on doing that, it does not retroactively make all LLM-generated code not-slop, it just means slop is the norm.
And obviously from the reception you’ve gotten, even that has yet to occur.
Even if that were true (and in some rare cases it probably is) the machine is trained on stolen data, ignoring all licensing or companies selling people’s contributions without their approval - and that’s just the tip of the iceberg.
To call it slop is a great way to discredit it and to not support an unethical business/technology.
to call it slop just undermines the time and effort i put into the project. its not just code, i put efforts towards testing and documentation. but sure… if you want to believe you’re poking holes on big-tech’s practices here.
To focus on the supposed time you put into it ignores the massive and numerous problems people here pointed out in many responses.
I get you are hurt by being banned, I really do and I probably disagree with it. But the problem with this “tool” (as you repeatedly frame it, trying to make it neutral) is not centered on you or any other individual. I’m sorry, sincerely.