mainloot

Thank you for reviewing the process. I know we had a disagreement about this so we appreciate y'all taking the time to address and make changes.

I don't feel obligated to get on any voice call with anyone. I wasn't offered a voice call at the time of submission, I don't care to have one now because you're getting called out for it. this just shows an absolute lack of experience in any real world work setting. I've seen developers submit complete garbage way before the age of LLMs, it's not going to stop any time soon. But on the flip side, I don't see ai generating results like this. Here's my prompt "Write a python function that can detect an mit license", here's what it generated: def license_is_mit(license_text): """ Determine if the provided text represents an MIT license. The function checks for key phrases that are typically found in MIT licenses, providing more reliable detection than simple string matching. Args: license_text (str): The license text to analyze Returns: bool: True if the text appears to be an MIT license, False otherwise """ if not license_text: return False # Normalize the text for comparison normalized_text = license_text.lower().replace('\n', ' ').replace('\r', ' ') # Key phrases commonly found in MIT licenses mit_indicators = [ "permission is hereby granted, free of charge", "mit license", "without restriction", "without warranty", "the software is provided \"as is\"" ] # Check for multiple indicators to increase accuracy matches = sum(1 for phrase in mit_indicators if phrase in normalized_text) # Consider it an MIT license if at least 3 indicators are present return matches >= 3 This is what modern ai generates, what are you guys even talking about lol Idk, I think your guy's opinions on ai are dated and maybe held more weight 2 years ago. Which ai gave you the code you provided? Let's discuss Oh, so there are rules to using ai, please teach me. From my perspective, you're the elitist in this situation. You're trying to assert arbitrary rules on the right ways of using ai. By your own admission, you use it too. I'd bet I could take your code and get something tool-assisted to assert it was ai generated. In the case of my submission, I did do that and didn't get a response back. In fact, I was told to move on. My intention was not to accuse someone of using ai, it was to make the point that anyone can make a flimsy argument/allegation that isn't true. Your reasoning based on this example is very poor. All of this does not answer and is an attempt to deflect from my original question: how do you avoid (besides feelings, friendship, and paperwork none of us are privy to) conflicts of interests in the context I described above. The reason I bring it up is because the person that rejected my wipe countdown plugin is the same person that offers a wipe countdown plugin (which is probably better) for $30. It's not a good look. I'm not accusing them of anything, I'm asking the question that's going to keep getting asked if it happens over and over. Again, your mindset is "trust me bro" You cared enough to say a bunch of words about it No, I'd believe you. I'd feel bad for your day to day work schedule, but I'd believe it lol I'm asking questions, I didn't mean to upset anyone. Though, the burden of proof is on you when you make the allegation and haven't provided one piece of even circumstantial evidence to prove you guys are cyborgs that can tell the difference between ai and human generated code. I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for that. Either way, our intention isn't to upset folks, it's to seek understanding. We'll chill for now, but the issue of transparency is something I think y'all should seriously consider. Having a nice strict set of rules ensures everyone's on a level playing field.

Let's consider it a different way, take Mevent for example. They have a lot of paid plugins in the CF catalog. They are also in a position to accept/reject plugin submissions. Can you not see that this introduces a conflict of interest (someone submits a cheaper/free version of what they provide)? It's the lack of transparency that introduces these situations, they can just feign ai-generation to keep their competition small. It opens the door for gatekeeping and how can the community trust that that won't be taken advantage of? If you're unwilling to be transparent about what is/isn't ai generated, can you at least be transparent about how you avoid these blatant conflicts of interest?

this doesn't make sense. If it's not trivial, it's not easy. How are you gonna tell me what's ai generated when you don't even know words.

nah man, I think you should start a company that can tell the difference between human generated and ai generated content. You'd probably make billions just 5 people in a room making decisions

The reason you want me to go into a private/voice call is because you don't have any real methodologies or processes that are legit. You would openly discuss them here if you did. Your guys' method is "trust me bro" edit: to be honest, I would be more concerned about the code quality than the use of AI. See WelcomePanel line 1500. That line is 27,000 (yes, twenty seven thousand lol) characters long. I know you guys are looking at bad code all day long, but just because someone follows best practices, doesn't mean they're using AI. Nor does it mean you have a repeatable process, let alone standards and methodologies, you guys are willing to share (highly sus). I have it in writing that you guys "think" my submission was written using AI (see attached image). So which one is it? Do you or do you not disclose these methods? Because if you don't, they can't be take seriously.

BS. If it were, y'all would be more transparent about it. As a senior SRE who works at publicly traded companies / big ol' enterprises in silicon valley, these false ideas of AI are pretty laughable, man. Wish you guys luck though.

I think the problem here isn't that there's a particular stance on AI-generated content, it's that you make claims that submissions are AI generated without providing any proof. There's a lack of transparency here in how you determine these things. I submitted a tiny script and it was rejected based off opinions that I used AI to write it. I took code from the person that made this claim against me, and I got AI to say their code was AI generated. The whole process of determining AI content is BS in general. And you're probably using AI to determine if it's AI which makes it even dumber.