They REALLY don't like AI, to the point of "wish I didn't need to rely on GCC and GRUB because they have AI in them" levels of hate AI. See this further down the linked page:

>The fork in question, of U-Boot, is heavily AI vibe-coded and thus useless to Libreboot. This is not mere conjecture; in said aforementioned U-Boot mailing list thread, the author stated thus. We will not, in any way, encourage or facilitate use of AI. It has been made clear that several projects Libreboot uses also have some AI-assisted commits; GCC, GRUB, etc. This is not our fault, but it is my intention that I and others will audit these projects in the future, de-slopping them and possibly even forking them entirely for that very reason.

Some of that reads really funny.

Also

> https://codeberg.org/ethical-foss/open-slopware

Feels more like a software discovery list than an indictment. Thanks for the categorization.

you arent kidding!

>"think AI makes you super hacker? think again: https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.09089"

not that im particularly pro-ai, but it seems a bit silly to rely on a paper about early-2025 ai when people are using late-2026 ai, given how different they are.

There is a respectable way to approach this and this.

The right way is something like, we've been getting spammed with a bunch of PR's from AI that we find difficult to review (because AI allows the average bob who isn't technically minded to make a PR). We have therefore decided not to allow AI submissions.

---

I think the people who have some moral / ideological issue and bring that into projects kind of feel like clowns to me. I agree with Linus that the point is to make something that people find useful, and obviously you want it to be maintainable.

Saying "it makes you dumber etc" is not related to the project, with all due respect it's non of your fucking business how I learn / retain skills.

Yeah, the (poisoned) AGENTS.md file reads lots like "f*ck AI", which feels like anti-AI dogmatism for me. If I really wanted to use this project, I would use Coreboot instead or fork it to remove proprietary blobs.

I can't use critical software that rejects AI to this degree for privacy reasons.

You can't expect to sufficiently protect your users privacy when not using AI for finding vulnerabilities.

Same thing with Asahi Linux with their highly anti-AI stance. I had a bit of hope when I saw someone was making an LLM assisted fork but it's not the same support.

While MacOS is likely becoming much more secure, Linux distros that reject AI would fall even further behind, if that's possible.

Edit: added critical

good!

Okay? Their repo, their rules.

Fork it and use Ai if you have a problem.

Unfortunately this is bad for one of my projects, a slop detector extension... it assumes that AGENTS.md be short in size to say stuff like "You may view and use this code but not edit or commit anything"... this rant is long enough that it classifies as slop itself!

Huh, good to see sane people still exist. Good on them.

[flagged]

Cool, that's why open source projects get left behind. The attitude

I find this hilarious since I'm actively having my clankers work on porting EDK2 to an SoC that's used in a Chromebook, though not the ones mentioned here.

I can't be the only one who thinks the way they handled that is incredibly disrespectful right?

It's their own business to disallow AI contributions. But instead of adding that to the Code Of Conduct they chose to knowingly misuse a file to target a group of people they don't like.

If I want to use AI on my copy of that repo, I have to delete that file and consider if the developer has added any more of what is (by intent) basically malware to the source code. Sure the file is just an unhinged rant, but now I have to wonder if they attempted to put some prompt injection in the repo.

Anti-AI is rationally and logically incorrect, because it focuses on inputs, rather than outputs.

The Linux kernel has always been focused on outcomes and outputs, which is the right focus. Here's Linus: https://x.com/LundukeJournal/status/2110524360377458786

Outputs: Code quality and long term maintenance matters. Outputs: Serving users with correctness, security and performance matters.

Focus on "purity of input" is a faith-based political filter, not engineering.