Here's the only simple, universal law that should apply:

THOU SHALT OWN THE CODE THAT THOU DOST RENDER.

All other values should flow from that, regardless of whether the code itself is written by you or AI or by your dog. If you look at the values in the article, they make sense even without LLMs in the picture.

The source of workslop is not AI, it's a lack of ownership. This is especially true for Open Source projects, which are seeing a wave of AI slop PR's precisely because the onus of ownership is largely on the maintainers and not the upstart "contributors."

Note also that this does not imply a universal set of values. Different organizations may well have different values for what ownership of code means -- E.g. in the "move fast, break things" era of FaceBook, workslop may have been perfectly fine for Zuck! (I'd bet it may even have hastened the era of "Move fast with stable infrastructure.") But those values must be consistently applied regardless of how the code came to be.