0 comments

I believe we should implement a new tag for submissions that are wholly or largely composed with the help of generative AI, LLMs, etc. The purpose of this tag is for people who do not wish to consume such content to be able to filter it out. The tag should ideally be set by the submitter, but if they are submitting the piece in ignorance of the fact that is created with the help of GenAI, it can be suggested by users. Recent examples of submissions (direct link to comments pointing this out):

Shouldn’t this be a flag, instead of a tag? No, a flag should be reserved for content that is off-topic. GenAI generated content can be on-topic, but should be marked as such. The flags name should be “slop” or some other negative term No, we’re already inundated with discussions about the perceived derogatory tone of the “vibecoding” tag. I believe the tag should sound more descriptive, to encourage submitters and authors to apply it voluntarily. There should be negative consequences for posting this sort of content. Other than more people whould filter out the content, and less people would click through to the submission, there should be no weighting of submission visibility. It’s really hard to detect this stuff! Isn’t that a problem? Unfortunately it is probably impossible to know if an submission is composed largely with GenAI. Authors, submitters and commenters should make a best-effort to accurately determine it. No negative consequences should accrue to submitters who submit the content in good faith. I use GenAI extensively but I don’t like the negative connotations assigned to it. I should not be punished for having my work labelled as such on this site This is more about labelling than value judgement. Fast food is still food, even if it’s not as nutritious as more healthy food. A reasonable consumer protection practice is accurately labelling foodstuffs with their nutritional contents, so as to let the consumer choose with as much information as possible.