They can’t fork it now because the fact that the AI commits aren’t labeled as such means there’s no way to tell which need to be removed.

So… they can’t do that because they can’t tell the difference between the human code and the AI’s code? So that means that either A. The human code is also slop or B. The AI’s code is on par with the human’s code. This comment really proves that this aversion to AI is purely ideological.

These people are ridiculous. This is an open source side project, if people don’t want “ai slop” in their app, then maybe they should fork the project and maintain it themselves.

If the social media platforms are the problem, then why control the devices and not the social media platforms? Makes no sense unless there’s an ulterior motive.

It’s an open standard that could lead to tighter controls on devices in the future. That’s an extremely slippery slope. Wouldn’t it make more sense to require age verification for social media platforms and outlaw online gambling? Why deanonymize the devices themselves? I suspect it has nothing to do with protecting children.

If I had to speculate, I think the people in power are scared of how much on-device AI could empower the masses and they’re laying the groundwork to curtail it right now.

I know where you’re coming from. I’d say it’s algorithm driven and platform centric consumption that’s bad. If things were more open, it’d be easier to use things like RSS readers to control your influences. The laws should be enforcing open standards, not closing things down.

These days a computer is pretty much another lobe of your brain. What happens when we actually have computers embedded inside of us? Are they going to restrict access to our own cognition?