If Your Software Project Welcomes Bots, Then All You'll Have Left at the End Is Bots (Same for Sites Which Permit LLM Slop; They End up as Slopfarms and No Human Wants to Contribute Anymore)
Linux is a very large project with many unique human contributors. Lately, however, Linus Torvalds became a slop apologist. Now he reports a flood of slop patches and bug reports (false positives that nobody wants to bother verifying!). Many sites, including Phoronix, point this out. This isn't the same Torvalds who years ago said slop was almost entirely hype (he was correct about that); months later a dinner with Bill Epsteingate was arranged for him, then he started dabbling in slop (boasted about this lunacy in public, it's like flaunting plagiarism is "efficient" or "fast").
It won't be long before:
- Slop commits in Linux outnumber humans'
- Not enough humans will be left to check those commits
- Gaping holes and severe bugs are identified in Linux only after catastrophic incidents (not caught by humans due to (2))
- More humans leave, lose interest in Linux (see (1) and (2) for explanation)
- Large piles of human-made code get culled (using the excuse of them being "old", hence "bad")
- Untested code gets added by slop without being properly flagged/annotated, let alone reviewed
- Linux gets a bad reputation for sloppy code
- Linux-libre inherits the same mess, i.e. slop-ware sans blobs (except unknown behaviour made by GAFAM LLMs)
This is no different - or hardly distinguishable - from the "lifecycle" of news sites that turn into worthless slopfarms; they start by "experiments" or allowing "just a little bit" (or "supervised by humans") slop; not too longer afterwards humans protest, many leave, and all that's left is a "filler" of word soups, made by LLM. The audience quickly notices this and abandons. █